
    8320.
    Duffey v. The State.
    Decided March 23, 1917.
    Accusation of larceny; from city court of Carrollton—Judge Beall. October 20, 1916.
    
      S. C. Boykin, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Willis Smith, solicitor, contra.
   ,Wade, C. J.

1. The bill of exceptions was not sued out in time to preserve the exception therein based upon the overruling of a demurrer to the accusation, and. there was no exception pendente lite. The assignment of error upon the same ground, which appears in the motion for a new trial, can not be considered. Redwine v. Street, 18 Ga. App. 77 (89 S. E. 163) ; Kent v. State, 15 Ga. App. 210 (82 S. E. 762) ; Wills v. Young, 15 Ga. App. 352 (83 S. E. 275); Coulson v. State, 13 Ga. App. 148 (2), 150 (78 S. E. 1108), and cases there cited; Mayor &c. of Dublin v. Dudley, 2 Ga. App. 762 (59 S. E. 84).

2. There is no substantial merit in either of the two remaining special grounds of the motion for a new trial.

3. The evidence supported the verdict, and the trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

■George and Luke, J.J., eoneur.  