24 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1986–2024 6 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 |
|---|---|---|
Walker v. Stategreen2 sentences2022See Walker v. State, 292 Ga. 262, 264 (2) n.2 (737 SE2d 311) (2013) (noting that “the sufficiency of the evidence standard and the discretionary standard given to the trial court pursuant to OCGA § 5-5-21 address two distinct legal issues”). 2022See Walker v. State, 292 Ga. 262, 264 (2) n.2 (737 SE2d 311) (2013) (noting that “the sufficiency of the evidence standard and the discretionary standard given to the trial court pursuant to OCGA § 5-5-21 address two distinct legal issues”). | 5 | 6 |
Jackson v. Virginiared2 sentences2024In considering a sufficiency of the evidence claim, “the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307, 319 (99 SCt 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979) (emphasis in original). 2024In considering a sufficiency of the evidence claim, “the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307, 319 (99 SCt 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979) (emphasis in original). | 4 | 7 |
King v. Stategreen2 sentences2023See King, 316 Ga. at 617 n.8. 2023See King, 316 Ga. at 616 n.8. | 3 | 3 |
Neverson v. Stategreen2 sentences2014As both appellate courts have explained, “ ‘the sufficiency of the evidence standard and the discretionary standard given to the trial court pursuant to [OCGA § 5-5-20 and] OCGA § 5-5-21 address two distinct legal issues, illustrated by the fact that the double jeopardy clause applies when a court finds the evidence insufficient, but not when a court holds that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.’ Walker [v. State, 292 Ga. 262, 264, n. 2 ( 737 SE2d 311 ) (2013)].” Neverson v. State, 324 Ga. App. 322, 322 (1), n. 3 ( 750 SE2d 397 ) (2013). 2014As both appellate courts have explained, “ ‘the sufficiency of the evidence standard and the discretionary standard given to the trial court pursuant to [OCGA § 5-5-20 and] OCGA § 5-5-21 address two distinct legal issues, illustrated by the fact that the double jeopardy clause applies when a court finds the evidence insufficient, but not when a court holds that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.’ Walker [v. State, 292 Ga. 262, 264, n. 2 ( 737 SE2d 311 ) (2013)].” Neverson v. State, 324 Ga. App. 322, 322 (1), n. 3 ( 750 SE2d 397 ) (2013). | 2 | 2 |
Hicks v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Hicks v. State, 285 Ga. 386, 388 (2) ( 677 SE2d 111 ) (2009) (“[a] trial court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal is reviewed by applying the sufficiency of the evidence test of Jackson v. Virginia”) (punctuation omitted). 7 Neither Chaney nor Cox leased the apartment, which was leased by Cox’s uncle. 8 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Prather v. State, 293 Ga. App. 312, 313 (1) ( 667 SE2d 113 ) (2008); see also OCGA § 24-4-6. 9 (Punctuation omitted.) Slaughter v. State, 282 Ga. App. 276, 280 2009See also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Hicks v. State, 285 Ga. 386, 388 (2) ( 677 SE2d 111 ) (2009) (“[a] trial court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal is reviewed by applying the sufficiency of the evidence test of Jackson v. Virginia”) (punctuation omitted). 7 Neither Chaney nor Cox leased the apartment, which was leased by Cox’s uncle. 8 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Prather v. State, 293 Ga. App. 312, 313 (1) ( 667 SE2d 113 ) (2008); see also OCGA § 24-4-6. 9 (Punctuation omitted.) Slaughter v. State, 282 Ga. App. 276, 280 | 2 | 2 |
Manuel v. Stategreen2 sentences2013We reiterate an observation we made in Manuel v. State, supra, 289 Ga. at 386 -387: “the sufficiency of the evidence standard and the discretionary standard given to the trial court pursuant to OCGA § 5-5-21 address two distinct legal issues, illustrated by the fact that the double j eopardy clause applies when a court finds the evidence insufficient, but not when a court holds that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. [Cits.]” See also Willis v. State, 263 Ga. 597 (1) ( 436 SE2d 204 ) (1993) (stating that an appellate court uses the standard of Jackson v. Virginia to review a t 2013We also take the occasion to reiterate an observation [our Supreme Court] made in Manuel v. State, 289 Ga. at 386 -387: the sufficiency of the evidence standard and the discretionary standard given to the trial court pursuant to OCGA § 5-5-21 address two distinct legal issues, illustrated by the fact that the double jeopardy clause applies when a court finds the evidence insufficient, but not when a court holds that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. | 1 | 3 |
McIntyre v. Stategreen2 sentences2022Instead, we defer to the “jury’s assessment of the weight and credibility of the evidence.” McIntyre v. State, 312 Ga. 531, 531 (1) (863 SE2d 166) (2021). 2022Instead, we defer to the “jury’s assessment of the weight and credibility of the evidence.” McIntyre v. State, 312 Ga. 531, 531 (1) (863 SE2d 166) (2021). | 1 | 1 |
Davenport v. Stategreen1 sentence2020See Davenport v. State, 309 Ga. __ , __ (4) ( 846 SE2d 83 ) (2020). | 1 | 1 |
Grant v. Stategreen2 sentences2016See Grant v. State, 298 Ga. 835, 836 (1) ( 785 SE2d 285 ) (2016). 2016See Grant v. State, 298 Ga. 835, 836 (1) ( 785 SE2d 285 ) (2016). | 1 | 1 |
Strapp v. Stategreen2 sentences2014But see Walker v. State, 292 Ga. 262 (2) ( 737 SE2d 311 ) (2013) (where the judgment was vacated and remanded for further action because the trial court failed to rule on the general grounds raised in appellant’s motion for new trial and applied only the sufficiency of the evidence standard in denying the motion); compare Strapp v. State, 326 Ga. App. 264 (3) ( 756 SE2d 333 ) (2014) (appellant induced error, if any, with respect to the trial court’s failure to rule upon his motion for new trial on the general grounds by indicating at the hearing that he was arguing only the sufficiency of the 2014But see Walker v. State, 292 Ga. 262 (2) ( 737 SE2d 311 ) (2013) (where the judgment was vacated and remanded for further action because the trial court failed to rule on the general grounds raised in appellant’s motion for new trial and applied only the sufficiency of the evidence standard in denying the motion); compare Strapp v. State, 326 Ga. App. 264 (3) ( 756 SE2d 333 ) (2014) (appellant induced error, if any, with respect to the trial court’s failure to rule upon his motion for new trial on the general grounds by indicating at the hearing that he was arguing only the sufficiency of the | 1 | 1 |
White v. Stategreen1 sentence2013Cf. White v. State, 293 Ga. 523, 524-525 (2) (___ SE2d ___) (2013); Choisnet v. State, 292 Ga. at 862 ; Walker v. State, 292 Ga. 262, 264-265 ( 737 SE2d 311 ) (2013); Manuel v. State, 289 Ga. 383, 385-386 (2) ( 711 SE2d 676 ) (2011). 3 We also take the occasion to “reiterate an observation [our Supreme Court] made in Manuel v. State, 289 Ga. at 386 -387: the sufficiency of the evidence standard and the discretionary standard given to the trial court pursuant to OCGA § 5-5-21 address two distinct legal issues, illustrated by the fact that the double jeopardy clause applies when a court finds th | 1 | 1 |
Priest v. Stategreen2 sentences2011See Priest v. State, 265 Ga. 399 (1) ( 456 SE2d 503 ) (1995); Ricketts v. Williams, supra. Decided June 13, 2011. 2011See Priest v. State, 265 Ga. 399 (1) ( 456 SE2d 503 ) (1995); Ricketts v. Williams, supra. Decided June 13, 2011. | 1 | 1 |
Prather v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Hicks v. State, 285 Ga. 386, 388 (2) ( 677 SE2d 111 ) (2009) (“[a] trial court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal is reviewed by applying the sufficiency of the evidence test of Jackson v. Virginia”) (punctuation omitted). 7 Neither Chaney nor Cox leased the apartment, which was leased by Cox’s uncle. 8 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Prather v. State, 293 Ga. App. 312, 313 (1) ( 667 SE2d 113 ) (2008); see also OCGA § 24-4-6. 9 (Punctuation omitted.) Slaughter v. State, 282 Ga. App. 276, 280 2009See also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Hicks v. State, 285 Ga. 386, 388 (2) ( 677 SE2d 111 ) (2009) (“[a] trial court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal is reviewed by applying the sufficiency of the evidence test of Jackson v. Virginia”) (punctuation omitted). 7 Neither Chaney nor Cox leased the apartment, which was leased by Cox’s uncle. 8 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Prather v. State, 293 Ga. App. 312, 313 (1) ( 667 SE2d 113 ) (2008); see also OCGA § 24-4-6. 9 (Punctuation omitted.) Slaughter v. State, 282 Ga. App. 276, 280 | 1 | 1 |
Mitchell v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See also Mitchell v. State, 268 Ga. 592, 593 ( 492 SE2d 204 ) (1997) (evidence of cocaine under floor mat at passenger’s feet insufficient to show constructive possession even though passenger was “extremely nervous”). 5 See, e.g., Oliveres v. State, 292 Ga. App. 460, 462 ( 664 SE2d 836 ) (2008) (upholding the conviction of a passenger of a vehicle for possession of cocaine because the passenger was seated in the rear of the vehicle, with no passenger seated in front, and the drugs were found in the rear cargo compartment of the car, to which the passenger had access). 2009See also Mitchell v. State, 268 Ga. 592, 593 ( 492 SE2d 204 ) (1997) (evidence of cocaine under floor mat at passenger’s feet insufficient to show constructive possession even though passenger was “extremely nervous”). 5 See, e.g., Oliveres v. State, 292 Ga. App. 460, 462 ( 664 SE2d 836 ) (2008) (upholding the conviction of a passenger of a vehicle for possession of cocaine because the passenger was seated in the rear of the vehicle, with no passenger seated in front, and the drugs were found in the rear cargo compartment of the car, to which the passenger had access). | 1 | 1 |
Slaughter v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Hicks v. State, 285 Ga. 386, 388 (2) ( 677 SE2d 111 ) (2009) (“[a] trial court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal is reviewed by applying the sufficiency of the evidence test of Jackson v. Virginia”) (punctuation omitted). 7 Neither Chaney nor Cox leased the apartment, which was leased by Cox’s uncle. 8 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Prather v. State, 293 Ga. App. 312, 313 (1) ( 667 SE2d 113 ) (2008); see also OCGA § 24-4-6. 9 (Punctuation omitted.) Slaughter v. State, 282 Ga. App. 276, 280 2009See also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Hicks v. State, 285 Ga. 386, 388 (2) ( 677 SE2d 111 ) (2009) (“[a] trial court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal is reviewed by applying the sufficiency of the evidence test of Jackson v. Virginia”) (punctuation omitted). 7 Neither Chaney nor Cox leased the apartment, which was leased by Cox’s uncle. 8 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Prather v. State, 293 Ga. App. 312, 313 (1) ( 667 SE2d 113 ) (2008); see also OCGA § 24-4-6. 9 (Punctuation omitted.) Slaughter v. State, 282 Ga. App. 276, 280 | 1 | 1 |
Gillis v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Hicks v. State, 285 Ga. 386, 388 (2) ( 677 SE2d 111 ) (2009) (“[a] trial court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal is reviewed by applying the sufficiency of the evidence test of Jackson v. Virginia”) (punctuation omitted). 4 (Citations omitted.) Gillis v. State, 285 Ga. App. 199, 200 (1) ( 645 SE2d 674 ) (2007). 2009See also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Hicks v. State, 285 Ga. 386, 388 (2) ( 677 SE2d 111 ) (2009) (“[a] trial court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal is reviewed by applying the sufficiency of the evidence test of Jackson v. Virginia”) (punctuation omitted). 4 (Citations omitted.) Gillis v. State, 285 Ga. App. 199, 200 (1) ( 645 SE2d 674 ) (2007). | 1 | 1 |
Oliveres v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See also Mitchell v. State, 268 Ga. 592, 593 ( 492 SE2d 204 ) (1997) (evidence of cocaine under floor mat at passenger’s feet insufficient to show constructive possession even though passenger was “extremely nervous”). 5 See, e.g., Oliveres v. State, 292 Ga. App. 460, 462 ( 664 SE2d 836 ) (2008) (upholding the conviction of a passenger of a vehicle for possession of cocaine because the passenger was seated in the rear of the vehicle, with no passenger seated in front, and the drugs were found in the rear cargo compartment of the car, to which the passenger had access). 2009See also Mitchell v. State, 268 Ga. 592, 593 ( 492 SE2d 204 ) (1997) (evidence of cocaine under floor mat at passenger’s feet insufficient to show constructive possession even though passenger was “extremely nervous”). 5 See, e.g., Oliveres v. State, 292 Ga. App. 460, 462 ( 664 SE2d 836 ) (2008) (upholding the conviction of a passenger of a vehicle for possession of cocaine because the passenger was seated in the rear of the vehicle, with no passenger seated in front, and the drugs were found in the rear cargo compartment of the car, to which the passenger had access). | 1 | 1 |
Blair v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Hicks v. State, 285 Ga. 386, 388 (2) ( 677 SE2d 111 ) (2009) (“[a] trial court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal is reviewed by applying the sufficiency of the evidence test of Jackson v. Virginia”) (punctuation omitted). 7 Neither Chaney nor Cox leased the apartment, which was leased by Cox’s uncle. 8 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Prather v. State, 293 Ga. App. 312, 313 (1) ( 667 SE2d 113 ) (2008); see also OCGA § 24-4-6. 9 (Punctuation omitted.) Slaughter v. State, 282 Ga. App. 276, 280 2009See also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Hicks v. State, 285 Ga. 386, 388 (2) ( 677 SE2d 111 ) (2009) (“[a] trial court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal is reviewed by applying the sufficiency of the evidence test of Jackson v. Virginia”) (punctuation omitted). 7 Neither Chaney nor Cox leased the apartment, which was leased by Cox’s uncle. 8 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Prather v. State, 293 Ga. App. 312, 313 (1) ( 667 SE2d 113 ) (2008); see also OCGA § 24-4-6. 9 (Punctuation omitted.) Slaughter v. State, 282 Ga. App. 276, 280 | 1 | 1 |
Fluker v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Hicks v. State, 285 Ga. 386, 388 (2) ( 677 SE2d 111 ) (2009) (“[a] trial court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal is reviewed by applying the sufficiency of the evidence test of Jackson v. Virginia”) (punctuation omitted). 7 Neither Chaney nor Cox leased the apartment, which was leased by Cox’s uncle. 8 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Prather v. State, 293 Ga. App. 312, 313 (1) ( 667 SE2d 113 ) (2008); see also OCGA § 24-4-6. 9 (Punctuation omitted.) Slaughter v. State, 282 Ga. App. 276, 280 2009See also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Hicks v. State, 285 Ga. 386, 388 (2) ( 677 SE2d 111 ) (2009) (“[a] trial court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal is reviewed by applying the sufficiency of the evidence test of Jackson v. Virginia”) (punctuation omitted). 7 Neither Chaney nor Cox leased the apartment, which was leased by Cox’s uncle. 8 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Prather v. State, 293 Ga. App. 312, 313 (1) ( 667 SE2d 113 ) (2008); see also OCGA § 24-4-6. 9 (Punctuation omitted.) Slaughter v. State, 282 Ga. App. 276, 280 | 1 | 1 |
Progressive Data System, Inc. v. Jefferson Randolph Corp.green1 sentence2006In fact, Justice Carley’s dissent in Progressive, upon which Excellatron relies, argued for the adoption of the federal manifest disregard standard and recognized the distinction between that standard and a sufficiency of the evidence analysis. 275 Ga. at 424 (2). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Walker v. Stategreen2 sentences2022See Walker v. State, 292 Ga. 262, 264 (2) n.2 (737 SE2d 311) (2013) (noting that “the sufficiency of the evidence standard and the discretionary standard given to the trial court pursuant to OCGA § 5-5-21 address two distinct legal issues”). 2022See Walker v. State, 292 Ga. 262, 264 (2) n.2 (737 SE2d 311) (2013) (noting that “the sufficiency of the evidence standard and the discretionary standard given to the trial court pursuant to OCGA § 5-5-21 address two distinct legal issues”). | 1 | 6 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Choisnet v. State
green
2 sentences2019Choisnet, 292 Ga. at 861 . 2013Cf. White v. State, 293 Ga. 523, 524-525 (2) (___ SE2d ___) (2013); Choisnet v. State, 292 Ga. at 862 ; Walker v. State, 292 Ga. 262, 264-265 ( 737 SE2d 311 ) (2013); Manuel v. State, 289 Ga. 383, 385-386 (2) ( 711 SE2d 676 ) (2011). 3 We also take the occasion to “reiterate an observation [our Supreme Court] made in Manuel v. State, 289 Ga. at 386 -387: the sufficiency of the evidence standard and the discretionary standard given to the trial court pursuant to OCGA § 5-5-21 address two distinct legal issues, illustrated by the fact that the double jeopardy clause applies when a court finds th | 2 | 2013–2019 |
Little v. the State
green
2 sentences2021This court does not reweigh evidence or resolve conflicts in testimony; instead, evidence is reviewed in a light most favorable to the verdict, with deference to the jury’s assessment of the weight and credibility of the evidence.” (Citation omitted.) Little v. State, 332 Ga. App. 553 (1) ( 774 SE2d 132 ) (2015). 2021This court does not reweigh evidence or resolve conflicts in testimony; instead, evidence is reviewed in a light most favorable to the verdict, with deference to the jury’s assessment of the weight and credibility of the evidence.” (Citation omitted.) Little v. State, 332 Ga. App. 553 (1) ( 774 SE2d 132 ) (2015). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Blackmon v. State
green
2 sentences2019"In reviewing a trial court's denial of a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal, [the appellate court] applies the sufficiency of the evidence standard of Jackson v. Virginia , [supra]." Blackmon v. State , 300 Ga. 35 , 38 (4), 793 S.E.2d 69 (2016) (citation omitted). 2019"In reviewing a trial court's denial of a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal, [the appellate court] applies the sufficiency of the evidence standard of Jackson v. Virginia , [supra]." Blackmon v. State , 300 Ga. 35 , 38 (4), 793 S.E.2d 69 (2016) (citation omitted). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Ellis v. State
green
1 sentence2016In Ellis v. State, 283 Ga. *6 App. 808 ( 642 SE2d 869 ) (2007), one of the very few cases in which we considered a sufficiency of the evidence challenge to a conviction under OCGA § 16-12-1(b)(3), the defendant left two children, ages one and two, home alone on a very cold morning for what he claimed was only a few minutes while he purportedly assisted a neighbor. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Smith v. State
green
2 sentences2016Smith v. State, 290 Ga. 428, 429 (1) ( 721 SE2d 892 ) (2012). 2016Smith v. State, 290 Ga. 428, 429 (1) ( 721 SE2d 892 ) (2012). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Willis v. State
green
2 sentences2013We reiterate an observation we made in Manuel v. State, supra, 289 Ga. at 386 -387: “the sufficiency of the evidence standard and the discretionary standard given to the trial court pursuant to OCGA § 5-5-21 address two distinct legal issues, illustrated by the fact that the double j eopardy clause applies when a court finds the evidence insufficient, but not when a court holds that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. [Cits.]” See also Willis v. State, 263 Ga. 597 (1) ( 436 SE2d 204 ) (1993) (stating that an appellate court uses the standard of Jackson v. Virginia to review a t 2013We reiterate an observation we made in Manuel v. State, supra, 289 Ga. at 386 -387: “the sufficiency of the evidence standard and the discretionary standard given to the trial court pursuant to OCGA § 5-5-21 address two distinct legal issues, illustrated by the fact that the double j eopardy clause applies when a court finds the evidence insufficient, but not when a court holds that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. [Cits.]” See also Willis v. State, 263 Ga. 597 (1) ( 436 SE2d 204 ) (1993) (stating that an appellate court uses the standard of Jackson v. Virginia to review a t | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Green v. State
green
2 sentences2005Green v. State, 244 Ga. App. 565 -566 (1) ( 536 SE2d 240 ) (2000). 2005Green v. State, 244 Ga. App. 565 -566 (1) ( 536 SE2d 240 ) (2000). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Stanley v. State
green
2 sentences1986The test to be applied is the sufficiency of the evidence test set out in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Stanley v. State, 254 Ga. 376 ( 329 SE2d 500 ) (1985). 1986The test to be applied is the sufficiency of the evidence test set out in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Stanley v. State, 254 Ga. 376 ( 329 SE2d 500 ) (1985). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
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.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.