22 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 2003–2023 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Martin v. Stategreen2 sentences2017See Martin v. State, 298 Ga. 259, 277-278 ( 779 SE2d 342 ) (2015). 2017See Martin v. State, 298 Ga. 259, 277-278 ( 779 SE2d 342 ) (2015). | 2 | 2 |
Watkins v. Stategreen2 sentences2008Again, to satisfy this prong, Morris had the burden of proving that “a reasonable probability exists that the outcome of the trial would have been different had the evidence been disclosed.” (Citation omitted.) Watkins v. State, 276 Ga. 578, 583 (4) ( 581 SE2d 23 ) (2003). 2008Again, to satisfy this prong, Morris had the burden of proving that “a reasonable probability exists that the outcome of the trial would have been different had the evidence been disclosed.” (Citation omitted.) Watkins v. State, 276 Ga. 578, 583 (4) ( 581 SE2d 23 ) (2003). | 2 | 2 |
Brown v. Stategreen1 sentence2023Brown, 303 Ga. at 619 (2). | 1 | 1 |
Brown v. Stategreen2 sentences2020Consequently, Smith has failed to carry his burden to prove the prejudice prong of his claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to request a mental competency evaluation.23 As a result, we conclude that the trial court did not 20 See Brown v. State, 302 Ga. 813, 815 (2) ( 809 SE2d 742 ) (2018) (holding that given trial counsel’s observations of defendant leading up to trial, and the curious timing of the alleged change in defendant’s mental status, it was not objectively unreasonable for trial counsel to decide not to seek a second mental evaluation). 21 Id. (punctuation omitted). 2020Consequently, Smith has failed to carry his burden to prove the prejudice prong of his claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to request a mental competency evaluation.23 As a result, we conclude that the trial court did not 20 See Brown v. State, 302 Ga. 813, 815 (2) ( 809 SE2d 742 ) (2018) (holding that given trial counsel’s observations of defendant leading up to trial, and the curious timing of the alleged change in defendant’s mental status, it was not objectively unreasonable for trial counsel to decide not to seek a second mental evaluation). 21 Id. (punctuation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Reid v. the Stategreen2 sentences2018Reid I , supra, 339 Ga. App. at 776 (2) (a), 792 S.E.2d 732 . 1 Thus, we already determined that Reid established the prejudice prong of the analysis, and we instructed the trial court on remand to move to the next phase of the analysis to determine if the failure to timely appeal was attributable to ineffective assistance of Reid's trial counsel. 2018Reid I , supra, 339 Ga. App. at 776 (2) (a), 792 S.E.2d 732 . 1 Thus, we already determined that Reid established the prejudice prong of the analysis, and we instructed the trial court on remand to move to the next phase of the analysis to determine if the failure to timely appeal was attributable to ineffective assistance of Reid's trial counsel. | 1 | 1 |
Berman v. Stategreen1 sentence2009See id. | 1 | 1 |
Schofield v. Holseygreen2 sentences2009Schofield v. Holsey, 281 Ga. 809, 811, n. 1 ( 642 SE2d 56 ) (2007). 2009Schofield v. Holsey, 281 Ga. 809, 811, n. 1 ( 642 SE2d 56 ) (2007). | 1 | 1 |
Ferguson v. Stategreen2 sentences2008Here, however, “[w]e need not decide whether [Morris] carried his burden to prove all the elements of a Brady violation, as we conclude that [Morris] has failed to carry his burden to prove the prejudice prong of his claim.” (Footnote omitted.) Ferguson v. State, 280 Ga. 893, 894 (2) ( 635 SE2d 144 ) (2006). 2008Here, however, “[w]e need not decide whether [Morris] carried his burden to prove all the elements of a Brady violation, as we conclude that [Morris] has failed to carry his burden to prove the prejudice prong of his claim.” (Footnote omitted.) Ferguson v. State, 280 Ga. 893, 894 (2) ( 635 SE2d 144 ) (2006). | 1 | 1 |
Lynch v. Stategreen2 sentences2007Lynch v. State, 280 Ga. 887, 890 (3) ( 635 SE2d 140 ) (2006). 2007Lynch v. State, 280 Ga. 887, 890 (3) ( 635 SE2d 140 ) (2006). | 1 | 1 |
Myers v. Stategreen2 sentences2006Under those circumstances, we agree with the trial court that Green has not made the necessary showing under the prejudice prong of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel that “a reasonable probability exists that, but for counsel’s errors, the outcome ofthe trial would have been different. [Cits.]’’ Myers v. State, 275 Ga. 709, 713 (4) ( 572 SE2d 606 ) (2002). 2006Under those circumstances, we agree with the trial court that Green has not made the necessary showing under the prejudice prong of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel that “a reasonable probability exists that, but for counsel’s errors, the outcome ofthe trial would have been different. [Cits.]’’ Myers v. State, 275 Ga. 709, 713 (4) ( 572 SE2d 606 ) (2002). | 1 | 1 |
Turpin v. Toddgreen1 sentence2006Battles v. Chapman, supra; Turpin v. Todd, supra at 828-829 (2) (b). | 1 | 1 |
Holcomb v. Stategreen2 sentences2005“A party may not complain on appeal of a ruling that he contributed to or acquiesced in by his own action, trial strategy, or conduct.” Holcomb v. State, 268 Ga. 100, 103 (2) ( 485 SE2d 192 ) (1997). 3 We note that a different result might be warranted from the one reached in the instant case if the counts that were part of the plea agreement pertained to different underlying transactions or events, or if the guilty plea at issue resulted from a nonnegotiated plea agreement. 4 Again, we note that a different result might be warranted if the faulty information received from trial counsel concer 2005“A party may not complain on appeal of a ruling that he contributed to or acquiesced in by his own action, trial strategy, or conduct.” Holcomb v. State, 268 Ga. 100, 103 (2) ( 485 SE2d 192 ) (1997). 3 We note that a different result might be warranted from the one reached in the instant case if the counts that were part of the plea agreement pertained to different underlying transactions or events, or if the guilty plea at issue resulted from a nonnegotiated plea agreement. 4 Again, we note that a different result might be warranted if the faulty information received from trial counsel concer | 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 sentences2012This appeal returns to us following our grant in 2010 of appellant Holly Cox's pro se application for a certificate of probable cause and our remand of the case to the habeas court with direction "to analyze and make appropriate findings and legal conclusions regarding the prejudice prong of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel." See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). 2012This appeal returns to us following our grant in 2010 of appellant Holly Cox's pro se application for a certificate of probable cause and our remand of the case to the habeas court with direction "to analyze and make appropriate findings and legal conclusions regarding the prejudice prong of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel." See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). | 2 | 2003–2012 |
Miller v. State
green
2 sentences2018A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Miller v. State , 285 Ga. 285 , 286, 676 S.E.2d 173 (2009). 2018A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Miller v. State , 285 Ga. 285 , 286, 676 S.E.2d 173 (2009). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Jennings v. State
green
2 sentences2017Accordingly, we conclude that [Jones] has failed to carry his burden to prove the prejudice prong of his claim that trial counsel was ineffective[.] Jennings v. State , 282 Ga. 679 , 680 (2), 653 S.E.2d 17 (2007) (citations and punctuation omitted). 2017Accordingly, we conclude that [Jones] has failed to carry his burden to prove the prejudice prong of his claim that trial counsel was ineffective[.] Jennings v. State , 282 Ga. 679 , 680 (2), 653 S.E.2d 17 (2007) (citations and punctuation omitted). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Rakestrau v. State
green
2 sentences2012"Deference is given to the [habeas] court's factual findings as to a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel and will be upheld on appeal unless clearly erroneous; the [habeas] court's legal conclusions, however, are reviewed de novo." Rakestrau v. State, 278 Ga. 872 (2), 608 S.E.2d 216 (2005). 2012"Deference is given to the [habeas] court's factual findings as to a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel and will be upheld on appeal unless clearly erroneous; the [habeas] court's legal conclusions, however, are reviewed de novo." Rakestrau v. State, 278 Ga. 872 (2), 608 S.E.2d 216 (2005). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Lloyd v. State
green
2 sentences2009On the legal issue raised in regard to the "inference" language in Lloyd v. State, 258 Ga. 645 (2)(b), 373 S.E.2d 1 (1988), I also agree with the majority that nothing in Lloyd changed the prejudice prong requirement that, to prevail on an ineffectiveness claim, a defendant must show a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, the defendant would have accepted the plea. 2009On the legal issue raised in regard to the "inference" language in Lloyd v. State, 258 Ga. 645 (2)(b), 373 S.E.2d 1 (1988), I also agree with the majority that nothing in Lloyd changed the prejudice prong requirement that, to prevail on an ineffectiveness claim, a defendant must show a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, the defendant would have accepted the plea. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Williams v. State
green
2 sentences2009Appellants thus failed to satisfy the prejudice prong of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel. (h) Although not separately enumerated as error, appellants additionally contend trial counsel were ineffective for failing to move to strike for cause potential jurors Pope and Hawk, [8] for failing to call critical witnesses [9] and for failing to investigate scientific evidence regarding the unreliability of eyewitness testimony. [10] Based on our review of the record, appellants have failed to overcome the strong presumption that counsel's conduct fell within the broad range of reasonab 2009Appellants thus failed to satisfy the prejudice prong of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel. (h) Although not separately enumerated as error, appellants additionally contend trial counsel were ineffective for failing to move to strike for cause potential jurors Pope and Hawk, [8] for failing to call critical witnesses [9] and for failing to investigate scientific evidence regarding the unreliability of eyewitness testimony. [10] Based on our review of the record, appellants have failed to overcome the strong presumption that counsel's conduct fell within the broad range of reasonab | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Walker v. Houston
green
2 sentences2007Therefore, pretermitting the question of deficient performance (Walker v. Houston, 277 Ga. 470 (1) ( 588 SE2d 715 ) (2003) (appellate court not required to address both components if showing on one insufficient)), Culmer has not established the prejudice prong of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel with regard to the telephone records. 2007Therefore, pretermitting the question of deficient performance (Walker v. Houston, 277 Ga. 470 (1) ( 588 SE2d 715 ) (2003) (appellate court not required to address both components if showing on one insufficient)), Culmer has not established the prejudice prong of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel with regard to the telephone records. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Bergeson v. State
green
2 sentences2007Accordingly, we conclude that [Jennings] has failed to carry his burden to prove the prejudice prong of his claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to request an independent psychiatric examination. [Cits.] Bergeson v. State, 272 Ga. 382 -383(2), 530 S.E.2d 190 (2000). 2007Accordingly, we conclude that [Jennings] has failed to carry his burden to prove the prejudice prong of his claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to request an independent psychiatric examination. [Cits.] Bergeson v. State, 272 Ga. 382 -383(2), 530 S.E.2d 190 (2000). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Battles v. Chapman
green
1 sentence2006Battles v. Chapman, supra; Turpin v. Todd, supra at 828-829 (2) (b). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Fuller v. State
green
2 sentences2004Since failure to satisfy either prong of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel is fatal to the claim of ineffectiveness (Fuller v. State, 277 Ga. 505 (3) ( 591 SE2d 782 ) (2004)), Freeman’s assertion that trial counsel’s failure to renew the motion for mistrial constituted ineffective assistance of counsel must fail. 2004Since failure to satisfy either prong of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel is fatal to the claim of ineffectiveness (Fuller v. State, 277 Ga. 505 (3) ( 591 SE2d 782 ) (2004)), Freeman’s assertion that trial counsel’s failure to renew the motion for mistrial constituted ineffective assistance of counsel must fail. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
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.