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.
22 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1975–2007 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Dobbs v. Stategreen2 sentences1979See Dobbs v. State, 235 Ga. 800 (4) (221 SE2d 576); Fortson v. State, 240 Ga. 5 (1) ( 239 SE2d 335 ). 1979See Dobbs v. State, 235 Ga. 800 (4) (221 SE2d 576); Fortson v. State, 240 Ga. 5 (1) ( 239 SE2d 335 ). | 2 | 2 |
Fortson v. Stategreen2 sentences1980“The record reveals that defense counsel cross examined witnesses, introduced [the defendant in his own behalf], examined certain exhibits, objected to the admission of certain evidence, attempted to discredit the testimony of . . . state’s witnesses, and made a ... closing argument.” Fortson v. State, 240 Ga. 5 ( 239 SE2d 335 ). 1980“The record reveals that defense counsel cross examined witnesses, introduced [the defendant in his own behalf], examined certain exhibits, objected to the admission of certain evidence, attempted to discredit the testimony of . . . state’s witnesses, and made a ... closing argument.” Fortson v. State, 240 Ga. 5 ( 239 SE2d 335 ). | 1 | 3 |
Wingfield v. Stategreen2 sentences2007See Watson, supra, 274 Ga. at 691 (2); Wingfield v. State, 226 Ga. App. 448, 449 (3) ( 486 SE2d 676 ) (1997). 2007See Watson, supra, 274 Ga. at 691 (2); Wingfield v. State, 226 Ga. App. 448, 449 (3) ( 486 SE2d 676 ) (1997). | 1 | 1 |
Watson v. Stategreen2 sentences2007See Watson, supra, 274 Ga. at 691 (2); Wingfield v. State, 226 Ga. App. 448, 449 (3) ( 486 SE2d 676 ) (1997). 2007See Watson, supra, 274 Ga. at 691 (2); Wingfield v. State, 226 Ga. App. 448, 449 (3) ( 486 SE2d 676 ) (1997). | 1 | 1 |
Ledford v. Stategreen2 sentences2003The record reveals that the defense did not object at any time. "[T]he `contemporaneous objection rule cannot be avoided by characterizing trial occurrences as examples of prosecutorial misconduct.' [Cit.]" Ledford v. State, 264 Ga. 60, 67 (18)(a), 439 S.E.2d 917 (1994). 2003The record reveals that the defense did not object at any time. "[T]he `contemporaneous objection rule cannot be avoided by characterizing trial occurrences as examples of prosecutorial misconduct.' [Cit.]" Ledford v. State, 264 Ga. 60, 67 (18)(a), 439 S.E.2d 917 (1994). | 1 | 1 |
City of College Park v. BATSON-COOK COMPANYgreen2 sentences1994Our review of the record reveals no error in the trial court’s ruling.” (Citations omitted.) City of College Park v. Batson-Cook Co., 196 Ga. App. 138, 140 ( 395 SE2d 385 ) (1990). 1994Our review of the record reveals no error in the trial court’s ruling.” (Citations omitted.) City of College Park v. Batson-Cook Co., 196 Ga. App. 138, 140 ( 395 SE2d 385 ) (1990). | 1 | 1 |
Slater v. Stategreen2 sentences1994At a restitution hearing, “[i]t is not sufficient for the trial judge to consider only the amount of the victim’s damages. [Cit.] Pursuant to OCGA § 17-14-10, the court must also consider other factors, including ‘(1) The present financial condition of the offender and his dependents; (and) (2) The probable future earning capacity of the offender and his dependents. . . .’ ‘Because the record reveals that such factors were not considered, that portion of the sentence imposing restitution is reversed and remanded for hearing in compliance *704 with (OCGA § 17-14-10).’ [Cit.] Pursuant to Garrett 1994At a restitution hearing, “[i]t is not sufficient for the trial judge to consider only the amount of the victim’s damages. [Cit.] Pursuant to OCGA § 17-14-10, the court must also consider other factors, including ‘(1) The present financial condition of the offender and his dependents; (and) (2) The probable future earning capacity of the offender and his dependents. . . .’ ‘Because the record reveals that such factors were not considered, that portion of the sentence imposing restitution is reversed and remanded for hearing in compliance *704 with (OCGA § 17-14-10).’ [Cit.] Pursuant to Garrett | 1 | 1 |
Rhodes v. Stategreen2 sentences1993See Rhodes v. State, 193 Ga. App. 28, 30 ( 386 SE2d 857 ) (1989). 3. 1993See Rhodes v. State, 193 Ga. App. 28, 30 ( 386 SE2d 857 ) (1989). 3. | 1 | 1 |
Wiley v. Stategreen2 sentences1987Wiley v. State, 178 Ga. App. 136, 138 ( 342 SE2d 342 ) (1986). 1987Wiley v. State, 178 Ga. App. 136, 138 ( 342 SE2d 342 ) (1986). | 1 | 1 |
Kennedy v. Stategreen2 sentences1987“In order to warrant the grant of a mistrial, there is a burden of showing not only error but prejudice.” Kennedy v. State, 179 Ga. App. 587, 592 (4) ( 347 SE2d 604 ) (1986). 1987“In order to warrant the grant of a mistrial, there is a burden of showing not only error but prejudice.” Kennedy v. State, 179 Ga. App. 587, 592 (4) ( 347 SE2d 604 ) (1986). | 1 | 1 |
Atlantic Zayre, Inc. v. Williamsgreen2 sentences1986Our review of the record reveals no error in the admission of this testimony, see Atlantic Zayre v. Williams, 172 Ga. App. 43, 45 (3) ( 322 SE2d 83 ) (1984), and should similar testimony be offered at retrial, any objection to the relevancy of this evidence should not be sustained. 1986Our review of the record reveals no error in the admission of this testimony, see Atlantic Zayre v. Williams, 172 Ga. App. 43, 45 (3) ( 322 SE2d 83 ) (1984), and should similar testimony be offered at retrial, any objection to the relevancy of this evidence should not be sustained. | 1 | 1 |
Gregson v. Webbgreen1 sentence1979See Gregson v. Webb, supra, at (3) and Strother v. Hill Aircraft &c. | 1 | 1 |
Reid v. Stategreen2 sentences1977The record reveals that defense counsel cross examined witnesses, introduced witnesses and documents on the defendant’s behalf, examined certain exhibits, objected to the admission of certain evidence, attempted to discredit the testimony of one of the state’s witnesses, and made a lengthy closing argument. " 'The decisions on which witnesses to call, whether and how to conduct cross-examinations, what jurors to accept or strike, what trial motions should be made, and all other strategic and tactical decisions are the exclusive province of the lawyer after consultation with his client.’ ” Reid 1977The record reveals that defense counsel cross examined witnesses, introduced witnesses and documents on the defendant’s behalf, examined certain exhibits, objected to the admission of certain evidence, attempted to discredit the testimony of one of the state’s witnesses, and made a lengthy closing argument. " 'The decisions on which witnesses to call, whether and how to conduct cross-examinations, what jurors to accept or strike, what trial motions should be made, and all other strategic and tactical decisions are the exclusive province of the lawyer after consultation with his client.’ ” Reid | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Davisgreen2 sentences1975However, the record reveals that the hearing on this matter was originally set for May 8,1975, and was continued at the request of the appellee because of the absence of a necessary witness, the child’s attending physician.'"All applications for continuance are addressed to the sound legal discretion of the court, and, if not expressly provided for, shall be granted or refused as the ends of justice may require.’ On numerous occasions the appellate courts have ruled that the discretion vested in the trial court in this respect will not be disturbed unless manifestly, flagrantly, or clearly abu 1975However, the record reveals that the hearing on this matter was originally set for May 8,1975, and was continued at the request of the appellee because of the absence of a necessary witness, the child’s attending physician.'"All applications for continuance are addressed to the sound legal discretion of the court, and, if not expressly provided for, shall be granted or refused as the ends of justice may require.’ On numerous occasions the appellate courts have ruled that the discretion vested in the trial court in this respect will not be disturbed unless manifestly, flagrantly, or clearly abu | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Garrett v. State
green
2 sentences1994At a restitution hearing, “[i]t is not sufficient for the trial judge to consider only the amount of the victim’s damages. [Cit.] Pursuant to OCGA § 17-14-10, the court must also consider other factors, including ‘(1) The present financial condition of the offender and his dependents; (and) (2) The probable future earning capacity of the offender and his dependents. . . .’ ‘Because the record reveals that such factors were not considered, that portion of the sentence imposing restitution is reversed and remanded for hearing in compliance *704 with (OCGA § 17-14-10).’ [Cit.] Pursuant to Garrett 1994At a restitution hearing, “[i]t is not sufficient for the trial judge to consider only the amount of the victim’s damages. [Cit.] Pursuant to OCGA § 17-14-10, the court must also consider other factors, including ‘(1) The present financial condition of the offender and his dependents; (and) (2) The probable future earning capacity of the offender and his dependents. . . .’ ‘Because the record reveals that such factors were not considered, that portion of the sentence imposing restitution is reversed and remanded for hearing in compliance *704 with (OCGA § 17-14-10).’ [Cit.] Pursuant to Garrett | 2 | 1993–1994 |
R. W. Page Corp. v. Lumpkin
green
1 sentence1995Id. at 579-580 (4) and fn. 8, 292 S.E.2d 815 . [2] In this regard, the record reveals that defense counsel sought a gag order to prevent any further statements by the district attorney. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Jarrett v. State
green
1 sentence1993Pursuant to OCGA § 17-14-10, the court must also consider other factors, including “(1) The present financial condition of the offender and his dependents; [and] (2) The probable future earning capacity of the offender and his dependents. . . .” “Because the record reveals that such factors were not *726 considered, that portion of the sentence imposing restitution is reversed and remanded for hearing in compliance with [OCGA § 17-14-10].” Jarrett v. State, 161 Ga. App. at 287 . | 1 | 1993–1993 |
White v. Kelso
green
2 sentences1993White v. Kelso, 261 Ga. 32 ( 401 SE2d 733 ) (1991). 1993White v. Kelso, 261 Ga. 32 ( 401 SE2d 733 ) (1991). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Batson v. Kentucky
green
1 sentence1988Batson, supra; Powell v. State, 187 Ga. App. 878 ( 372 SE2d 234 ) (1988). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Berry v. Morton
neutral
2 sentences1988Viewing the record and parties’ arguments, see Berry v. Morton, 152 Ga. App. 117 -118 (2) ( 262 SE2d 263 ) (1979), it is apparent that appellees do not claim excusable neglect because they were uncertain of King’s death, compare id., or because they were misled as to the identity of the administrator of her estate. 1988Viewing the record and parties’ arguments, see Berry v. Morton, 152 Ga. App. 117 -118 (2) ( 262 SE2d 263 ) (1979), it is apparent that appellees do not claim excusable neglect because they were uncertain of King’s death, compare id., or because they were misled as to the identity of the administrator of her estate. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Powell v. State
green
2 sentences1988Batson, supra; Powell v. State, 187 Ga. App. 878 ( 372 SE2d 234 ) (1988). 1988Batson, supra; Powell v. State, 187 Ga. App. 878 ( 372 SE2d 234 ) (1988). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Rigden v. Jordan & Stewart
green
1 sentence1986The case cited by appellant in support of this enumeration, Rigden v. Jordan & Stewart, 81 Ga. 668 ( 7 SE 857 ) (1888), is distinguishable on its facts. (c) The trial court did not err by refusing to admit as irrelevant two exhibits proferred by appellant which showed that two merchants, not parties to the case, had contacted appellant about the bad checks they had received. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Mapp v. First Georgia Bank
green
2 sentences1986In Mapp v. First Ga. Bank, 156 Ga. App. 380 ( 274 SE2d 765 ) (1980), appellee bank repossessed and sold without notice to appellant an automobile in which (unbeknownst to appellant) the bank had a security interest. 1986In Mapp v. First Ga. Bank, 156 Ga. App. 380 ( 274 SE2d 765 ) (1980), appellee bank repossessed and sold without notice to appellant an automobile in which (unbeknownst to appellant) the bank had a security interest. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Locklear v. Payne
neutral
2 sentences1984The case of Locklear v. Payne, 124 Ga. App. 845 (4) ( 186 SE2d 439 ) (1971) is not authority for a contrary conclusion, for although the court noted therein that the defendant had not produced any evidence of fraud, accident or mistake in opposition to the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, an examination of the record reveals that no defense of fraud, accident, or mistake had been raised by the defendants in their pleadings, nor had such an issue been raised on appeal. 3. 1984The case of Locklear v. Payne, 124 Ga. App. 845 (4) ( 186 SE2d 439 ) (1971) is not authority for a contrary conclusion, for although the court noted therein that the defendant had not produced any evidence of fraud, accident or mistake in opposition to the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, an examination of the record reveals that no defense of fraud, accident, or mistake had been raised by the defendants in their pleadings, nor had such an issue been raised on appeal. 3. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Yancey v. State
green
2 sentences1976Yancey v. State, 232 Ga. 167 ( 205 SE2d 282 ). 3. 1976Yancey v. State, 232 Ga. 167 ( 205 SE2d 282 ). 3. | 1 | 1976–1976 |
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.