1487 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

Search for:

Reading Time: 2 minutes [303 words]

Visible Translated Text Is As Follows:

(STATES RESPONSE TO AMENDMENT 1, 2, 3, & 4.)

State of Georgia, (1.) No. 29410.
Va. (1.) Fulton Superior Court.
Leo M. Frank. (1.) Extraordinary Motion For New
(1.) Trial.

GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.

State of Georgia, answering the several amendments to the
extraordinary motion for a new trial, as filed by movant, Leo M.
Frank, and taking them up in the order in which they were
presented to the Court, says:

1. As to the amendment claiming that J. W. Boozer, on the
afternoon of April 26, 1913, at about 4:15 o'clock met Jim Conley
on Peters street near Castleberry street; The State says that,
in the first place, the said Boozer is absolutely mistaken as
to the date that he saw said Jim Conley. The State submits that
said Jim Conley did see said Boozer on several occasions, and
probably the day before, and that the defendant, Leo. M. Frank,
was looking after, for the said Jim Conley, the payment of cer-
tain dues, which Jim Conley owed on a certain watch. The said
Boozer, the State submits, is not sustained by any other witness
so far as this record shows, in his claim as to seeing Conley
at the time and place stated, and is flatly contradicted by said
Conley, who is sustained as to his whereabouts by Evey Jones and
other witnesses.

But the State submits that at best, even if the affidavit of
the said Boozer should be true, that it merely amounts to
impeaching evidence, insofar as Jim Conley is concerned, and
under the law furnishes no ground for setting aside the verdict
of guilty, as rendered against said Frank. This would be true,
even if the said Boozer had contradicted the said Conley as to
his whereabouts at an hour which would have rendered it impos-
sible for the said Conley to have aided the said Frank in the
manner and form as testified to by said Conley on the trial of

114