How cited: Guess v. State · Go Syfert

Guess v. State (1992)

green · 27 citation events across 2 courts. Showing the 5 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1993 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
199320092026
green Davis v. State (2008)
Rule Authority · Ga. · 2 citations in this opinion
However, we have held that testimony recounting admissions of guilt by a declarant to a third party are admissible at trial when “the declarant is present, testifies, and is subject to cross-examination.” Guess v. State, 262 Ga. 487, 488-489 (2) ( 422 SE2d 178 ) (1992).
Rule Authority · Ga. Ct. App.
OCGA § 24-9-83; Guess v. State, 262 Ga. 487, 488 ( 422 SE2d 178 ) (1992); Green v. State of Ga., 43 Ga. 368 (2) (1871) (the impeaching statement must be relevant).
green Drane v. State (1995)
Rule Authority · Ga.
While this type of evidence is generally inadmissible, see Guess v. State, 262 Ga. 487, 488 ( 422 SE2d 178 ) (1992), it may, nevertheless, be admitted in exceptional circumstances under Chambers and Green when it is both reliable and necessary.
green Grant v. State (1994)
Rule Authority · Ga. Ct. App.
While it is an old and sound rule which excludes as incompetent any hearsay testimony relating statements attributed to an out-of-court declarant to the effect that the declarant, and not the accused, was the perpetrator of a crime (see Lyon v. State, 22 Ga. 399 ), that long-standing rule does not apply to exclude evidence that the declarant is the perpetrator where “the declarant is present, testifies, and is subject to cross-examination.” Guess v. State, 262 Ga. 487, 489 (…
green Gardner v. State (1993)
Cited (see also) · Ga. · signal: compare · 2 citations in this opinion
Compare Guess v. State, 262 Ga. 487 ( 422 SE2d 178 ) (1992) (where this court held that the above-stated rule is not applicable where the declarant is present, testifies, and is subject to cross-examination).