Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 2005–2025 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Georgia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Benham v. Stategreen2 sentences2005The criminal defendant must overcome the strong presumption that trial counsel's conduct falls within the broad range of reasonable professional conduct. [Cit.] The trial court's findings with respect to effective assistance of counsel will be affirmed unless clearly erroneous. [Cit.] Domingues v. State, 277 Ga. 373, 374 (2), 589 S.E.2d 102 (2003). (a) Trial counsel asserted the defenses of justification, OCGA §§ 16-3-20(1); 16-3-21(a), and use of force in defense of real property other than habitation, [1] OCGA § 16-3-24. [2] Relying on Benham v. State, 277 Ga. 516 , 591 S.E.2d 824 (2004), Pa 2005The criminal defendant must overcome the strong presumption that trial counsel's conduct falls within the broad range of reasonable professional conduct. [Cit.] The trial court's findings with respect to effective assistance of counsel will be affirmed unless clearly erroneous. [Cit.] Domingues v. State, 277 Ga. 373, 374 (2), 589 S.E.2d 102 (2003). (a) Trial counsel asserted the defenses of justification, OCGA §§ 16-3-20(1); 16-3-21(a), and use of force in defense of real property other than habitation, [1] OCGA § 16-3-24. [2] Relying on Benham v. State, 277 Ga. 516 , 591 S.E.2d 824 (2004), Pa | 2 | 3 |
Coleman v. Stategreen2 sentences2025However, “[c]ritical to the application of the defense of 20 habitation is the moment in time at which the defendant resorts to deadly force and the act being performed by the victim at that moment.” Coleman v. State, 286 Ga. 291, 298 (6) (687 SE2d 427) (2009). 2025However, “[c]ritical to the application of the defense of 20 habitation is the moment in time at which the defendant resorts to deadly force and the act being performed by the victim at that moment.” Coleman v. State, 286 Ga. 291, 298 (6) (687 SE2d 427) (2009). | 2 | 2 |
Hicks v. Stategreen2 sentences2017See Hicks v. State, 287 Ga. 260, 262 ( 695 SE2d 195 ) (2010) (“It is not error to refuse a justification charge where there is no evidence to support it.”). 2 3. 2017See Hicks v. State, 287 Ga. 260, 262 ( 695 SE2d 195 ) (2010) (“It is not error to refuse a justification charge where there is no evidence to support it.”). 2 3. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Newmangreen1 sentence2020See Newman I, supra, 305 Ga. at 797-798 (2) (a). | 1 | 1 |
James v. Stategreen2 sentences2012See James v. State, 275 Ga. 387, 389 (6) ( 565 SE2d 802 ) (2002). 2012See James v. State, 275 Ga. 387, 389 (6) ( 565 SE2d 802 ) (2002). | 1 | 1 |
Lewis v. Stategreen2 sentences2011While slight evidence will support the giving of a jury instruction, Lewis v. State, 292 Ga. App. 257, 264 (2) ( 663 SE2d 721 ) (2008), there was no evidence in this case to support an instruction on defense of habitation pursuant to OCGA § 16-3-23. 2011While slight evidence will support the giving of a jury instruction, Lewis v. State, 292 Ga. App. 257, 264 (2) ( 663 SE2d 721 ) (2008), there was no evidence in this case to support an instruction on defense of habitation pursuant to OCGA § 16-3-23. | 1 | 1 |
Domingues v. Stategreen2 sentences2005The criminal defendant must overcome the strong presumption that trial counsel's conduct falls within the broad range of reasonable professional conduct. [Cit.] The trial court's findings with respect to effective assistance of counsel will be affirmed unless clearly erroneous. [Cit.] Domingues v. State, 277 Ga. 373, 374 (2), 589 S.E.2d 102 (2003). (a) Trial counsel asserted the defenses of justification, OCGA §§ 16-3-20(1); 16-3-21(a), and use of force in defense of real property other than habitation, [1] OCGA § 16-3-24. [2] Relying on Benham v. State, 277 Ga. 516 , 591 S.E.2d 824 (2004), Pa 2005The criminal defendant must overcome the strong presumption that trial counsel's conduct falls within the broad range of reasonable professional conduct. [Cit.] The trial court's findings with respect to effective assistance of counsel will be affirmed unless clearly erroneous. [Cit.] Domingues v. State, 277 Ga. 373, 374 (2), 589 S.E.2d 102 (2003). (a) Trial counsel asserted the defenses of justification, OCGA §§ 16-3-20(1); 16-3-21(a), and use of force in defense of real property other than habitation, [1] OCGA § 16-3-24. [2] Relying on Benham v. State, 277 Ga. 516 , 591 S.E.2d 824 (2004), Pa | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Strickland v. Washington
green
2 sentences2019Yet trial counsel failed to do so here, and even admitted at Swanson's hearing on a motion for new trial that he did not request such a charge because at that time, he "did not know about" the statute defining "habitation" to mean a "motor vehicle"; that he "didn't realize" that "habitation was expanded to the point of dealing with a car"; and that "[i]t did not appear to" him "that use of force and defense of habitation applied." 5 And although decisions of counsel made based on a misunderstanding of the law are not automatically deficient, see State v. Patel , 280 Ga. 181 , 182-183, 626 S.E. 2019Yet trial counsel failed to do so here, and even admitted at Swanson's hearing on a motion for new trial that he did not request such a charge because at that time, he "did not know about" the statute defining "habitation" to mean a "motor vehicle"; that he "didn't realize" that "habitation was expanded to the point of dealing with a car"; and that "[i]t did not appear to" him "that use of force and defense of habitation applied." 5 And although decisions of counsel made based on a misunderstanding of the law are not automatically deficient, see State v. Patel , 280 Ga. 181 , 182-183, 626 S.E. | 3 | 2011–2019 |
Johnson v. State
green
2 sentences2019Yet trial counsel failed to do so here, and even admitted at Swanson's hearing on a motion for new trial that he did not request such a charge because at that time, he "did not know about" the statute defining "habitation" to mean a "motor vehicle"; that he "didn't realize" that "habitation was expanded to the point of dealing with a car"; and that "[i]t did not appear to" him "that use of force and defense of habitation applied." 5 And although decisions of counsel made based on a misunderstanding of the law are not automatically deficient, see State v. Patel , 280 Ga. 181 , 182-183, 626 S.E. 2019Yet trial counsel failed to do so here, and even admitted at Swanson's hearing on a motion for new trial that he did not request such a charge because at that time, he "did not know about" the statute defining "habitation" to mean a "motor vehicle"; that he "didn't realize" that "habitation was expanded to the point of dealing with a car"; and that "[i]t did not appear to" him "that use of force and defense of habitation applied." 5 And although decisions of counsel made based on a misunderstanding of the law are not automatically deficient, see State v. Patel , 280 Ga. 181 , 182-183, 626 S.E. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Shields v. State
green
2 sentences2019Yet trial counsel failed to do so here, and even admitted at Swanson's hearing on a motion for new trial that he did not request such a charge because at that time, he "did not know about" the statute defining "habitation" to mean a "motor vehicle"; that he "didn't realize" that "habitation was expanded to the point of dealing with a car"; and that "[i]t did not appear to" him "that use of force and defense of habitation applied." 5 And although decisions of counsel made based on a misunderstanding of the law are not automatically deficient, see State v. Patel , 280 Ga. 181 , 182-183, 626 S.E. 2019Yet trial counsel failed to do so here, and even admitted at Swanson's hearing on a motion for new trial that he did not request such a charge because at that time, he "did not know about" the statute defining "habitation" to mean a "motor vehicle"; that he "didn't realize" that "habitation was expanded to the point of dealing with a car"; and that "[i]t did not appear to" him "that use of force and defense of habitation applied." 5 And although decisions of counsel made based on a misunderstanding of the law are not automatically deficient, see State v. Patel , 280 Ga. 181 , 182-183, 626 S.E. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Patel
green
2 sentences2019Yet trial counsel failed to do so here, and even admitted at Swanson's hearing on a motion for new trial that he did not request such a charge because at that time, he "did not know about" the statute defining "habitation" to mean a "motor vehicle"; that he "didn't realize" that "habitation was expanded to the point of dealing with a car"; and that "[i]t did not appear to" him "that use of force and defense of habitation applied." 5 And although decisions of counsel made based on a misunderstanding of the law are not automatically deficient, see State v. Patel , 280 Ga. 181 , 182-183, 626 S.E. 2019Yet trial counsel failed to do so here, and even admitted at Swanson's hearing on a motion for new trial that he did not request such a charge because at that time, he "did not know about" the statute defining "habitation" to mean a "motor vehicle"; that he "didn't realize" that "habitation was expanded to the point of dealing with a car"; and that "[i]t did not appear to" him "that use of force and defense of habitation applied." 5 And although decisions of counsel made based on a misunderstanding of the law are not automatically deficient, see State v. Patel , 280 Ga. 181 , 182-183, 626 S.E. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.