In re Wallace, 635 S.E.2d 706 (Ga. 2006). · Go Syfert
Search
In re Wallace, 635 S.E.2d 706 (Ga. 2006). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
11 citation events (11 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: DUNSTON v. THE STATE (Two Cases) (ga, 2024-06-11)
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) DUNSTON v. THE STATE (Two Cases) (2×)
Ga. · 2024 · confidence medium
See United States v. Sotelo, 97 F3d 782, 797 (IV) (5th Cir. 1996) (Federal “Rule 606 (b) concerns the competence of juror testimony during ‘an inquiry into the validity of a verdict.’ Since the problem was brought to the court’s attention prior to verdict, 606 (b) does not impact the availability of juror testimony in resolving the factual issues raised.”); Collins v. State, 308 Ga. 608, 611 (2) ( 842 SE2d 811 ) (2020) (“Georgia’s Rule 606 (b) is borrowed from Federal Rule of Evidence 606 and, as such, when interpreting its meaning, we are guided by the decisions of federal appea…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Lewis v. State (2×)
Ga. · 2021 · confidence medium
Moreover, a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel is offense-specific, meaning that “even if the right to counsel has attached to one offense for which the defendant has been charged, it does not attach to even a factually-related separate offense for which the defendant has not been charged.” Chenoweth v. State, 281 Ga. 7, 9 ( 635 SE2d 730 ) (2006); see also McNeil v. Wisconsin, 501 U.S. 171, 175 ( 111 SCt 2204 , 115 LE2d 158) (1991).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Cade v. State
Ga. · 2011 · confidence medium
Chenoweth v. State, 281 Ga. 7, 13 (5) ( 635 SE2d 730 ) (2006); Rickman v. State, 277 Ga. 277, 281 (3) ( 587 SE2d 596 ) (2003). 5.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hill v. State
Ga. · 2008 · confidence medium
See White v. State, supra at 570 (4); Chenoweth v. State, 281 Ga. 7, 11 (3) ( 635 SE2d 730 ) (2006). (b) Hill further contends that trial counsel was ineffective in requesting a jury instruction which was contrary to the defense strategy of convincing the jury that there was insufficient corroboration of Hill’s statement.
discussed Cited "see" Antonio Cecil Maxwell v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2023 · signal: see · confidence high
See Chenoweth v. State, 281 Ga. at 10 (“We need not decide . . . whether to construe the right to counsel under the Georgia Constitution to be consistent with the majority or the dissenting opinion in Cobb, as, even under the dissenting opinion in Cobb, Chenoweth was not denied his right to counsel”).
discussed Cited "see" Saffold v. State
Ga. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See Chenoweth v. State, 281 Ga. 7, 11-12 ( 635 SE2d 730 ) (2006) (“Because the jurors’ answers to the trial court’s questions show that the jurors’ error in discussing the evidence [before deliberations] was not so inherently prejudicial as to require a new trial, we conclude that the trial court did not err in denying Chenoweth’s motion for mistrial.”). 6.
IN THE MATTER OF MATTHEW WAYNE WALLACE
S06Y1680.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Sep 18, 2006.
635 S.E.2d 706
William P. Smith III, General Counsel State Bar, Jonathan W. Hewett, Assistant General Counsel State Bar, for State Bar of Georgia.
Published
Per curiam.

This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the Report of the Special Master recommending that this Court accept Matthew Wayne Wallace’s petition for voluntary surrender of his license, which is tantamount to disbarment.

The record shows that Wallace improperly disbursed trust account funds and failed to properly account for those funds. He also failed to respond to the State Bar’s Notice of Investigation in this matter. Such conduct violates Rules 1.15 (I) and 9.3 of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, Bar Rule 4-102 (d). The record shows that Wallace was previously suspended for two years based on his abandonment of a client matter to the client’s detriment and lying to the client about the matter. In the Matter of Wallace, 275 Ga. 629 (571 SE2d 388) (2002).

After a review of the record, we hereby accept the petition for voluntary surrender of Wallace’s license. It is hereby ordered that the name of Matthew Wayne Wallace be removed from the rolls of persons authorized to practice law in the State of Georgia. Wallace is reminded of his duties pursuant to Bar Rule 4-219 (c).

Voluntary surrender of license accepted.

All the Justices concur.