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.
21 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1972–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Boles v. Leegreen2 sentences2010“A party alleging error carries the burden of showing it affirmatively by the record, and when that burden is not met, the judgment is assumed to be correct and will be affirmed.” (Footnote omitted.) Boles v. Lee, 270 Ga. 454, 455 (1) ( 511 SE2d 177 ) (1999). 2010“A party alleging error carries the burden of showing it affirmatively by the record, and when that burden is not met, the judgment is assumed to be correct and will be affirmed.” (Footnote omitted.) Boles v. Lee, 270 Ga. 454, 455 (1) ( 511 SE2d 177 ) (1999). | 2 | 2 |
Cunningham v. Stategreen2 sentences2008Although C.L. claims that a continuance should have been granted so that a transcript of the detention hearing could have been obtained and reviewed by his counsel, C.L. has failed "to demonstrate specifically how the transcript would have helped his examinations at trial or otherwise assist in his H defense." Cunningham v. State, 244 Ga. App. 231, 233 (1), 535 S.E.2d 262 (2000). 2008Although C.L. claims that a continuance should have been granted so that a transcript of the detention hearing could have been obtained and reviewed by his counsel, C.L. has failed "to demonstrate specifically how the transcript would have helped his examinations at trial or otherwise assist in his H defense." Cunningham v. State, 244 Ga. App. 231, 233 (1), 535 S.E.2d 262 (2000). | 2 | 2 |
In Re RBgreen2 sentences2003In re R.B., 264 Ga. 602, 603 (1), 448 S.E.2d 690 (1994); see also OCGA § 15-11-30.2(a)(3)(B), (C). 2003Citing C.L.A. v. State of Ga., 137 Ga.App. 511 (1), 224 S.E.2d 491 (1976), the appellant challenges this evidentiary ruling as error, contending that a transfer hearing "may not, as a matter of law, be treated as similar to a probable cause hearing." We disagree. "[T]he pronouncement in C.L.A. v. State of Ga., supra, that a transfer hearing is [different] [3] from a preliminary detention hearing does not mean that a higher standard of proof that the child committed the delinquent act is required in a transfer hearing." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) In re R.B., 264 Ga. 602, 603 (1), 448 S | 2 | 2 |
Baker v. City of Atlantagreen2 sentences1985The juvenile court found appellant to be 16 years of age based on evidence presented to the court at appellant’s detention hearing. “ Tt is well settled that a court may take judicial notice of its own records in the immediate case or proceedings before it.’ [Cit.]” Baker v. City of Atlanta, 211 Ga. 34, 35 ( 83 SE2d 682 ) (1954). 1985The juvenile court found appellant to be 16 years of age based on evidence presented to the court at appellant’s detention hearing. “ Tt is well settled that a court may take judicial notice of its own records in the immediate case or proceedings before it.’ [Cit.]” Baker v. City of Atlanta, 211 Ga. 34, 35 ( 83 SE2d 682 ) (1954). | 2 | 2 |
In the Interest of E. C.green2 sentences2018C. , 291 Ga. App. 440 , 441, 662 S.E.2d 252 (2008) (applying Sanchez in *711 the context of former OCGA § 15-11-49 (e), which required the filing of a petition within five days of a detention hearing if an allegedly deprived child was not released from shelter care at such hearing). 2018C. , 291 Ga. App. 440 , 441, 662 S.E.2d 252 (2008) (applying Sanchez in *711 the context of former OCGA § 15-11-49 (e), which required the filing of a petition within five days of a detention hearing if an allegedly deprived child was not released from shelter care at such hearing). | 1 | 2 |
In the Interest of K. C.green1 sentence2016C., 290 Ga. App. 416, 417 ( 659 SE2d 821 ) (2008) (“The juvenile court procedures do not implicate the merits of a delinquency petition, and their violation does not demand an acquittal. | 1 | 1 |
Sanchez v. Walker County Department of Family & Children Servicesgreen2 sentences2016See also Sanchez v. Walker County Dept. of Family and Children Svcs., 237 Ga. 406, 410 ( 229 SE2d 66 ) (1976) (holding that the remedy for the State’s failure to comply with the former Juvenile Code’s requirement to hold a detention hearing within 72 hours of the child being placed in detention was dismissal without prejudice); In the Interest of E. 2016See also Sanchez v. Walker County Dept. of Family and Children Svcs., 237 Ga. 406, 410 ( 229 SE2d 66 ) (1976) (holding that the remedy for the State’s failure to comply with the former Juvenile Code’s requirement to hold a detention hearing within 72 hours of the child being placed in detention was dismissal without prejudice); In the Interest of E. | 1 | 1 |
Morris v. Stategreen2 sentences1997See Morris v. State, 220 Ga. App. 633, 636 ( 469 SE2d 848 ) (1996); Powell v. State, 198 Ga. App. 509, 512 ( 402 SE2d 108 ) (1991). 1997See Morris v. State, 220 Ga. App. 633, 636 ( 469 SE2d 848 ) (1996); Powell v. State, 198 Ga. App. 509, 512 ( 402 SE2d 108 ) (1991). | 1 | 1 |
Powell v. Stategreen2 sentences1997See Morris v. State, 220 Ga. App. 633, 636 ( 469 SE2d 848 ) (1996); Powell v. State, 198 Ga. App. 509, 512 ( 402 SE2d 108 ) (1991). 1997See Morris v. State, 220 Ga. App. 633, 636 ( 469 SE2d 848 ) (1996); Powell v. State, 198 Ga. App. 509, 512 ( 402 SE2d 108 ) (1991). | 1 | 1 |
TK v. Stategreen2 sentences1988K. v. State of Ga., 126 Ga. App. 269, 275 ( 190 SE2d 588 ) (1972), holding that a showing of a lack of representation at a detention hearing is relevant only to finding “whether beyond a reasonable doubt lack of counsel did or did not result in harm or prejudice to his fair trial rights at the jury trial.” Decided February 3, 1988. 1988K. v. State of Ga., 126 Ga. App. 269, 275 ( 190 SE2d 588 ) (1972), holding that a showing of a lack of representation at a detention hearing is relevant only to finding “whether beyond a reasonable doubt lack of counsel did or did not result in harm or prejudice to his fair trial rights at the jury trial.” Decided February 3, 1988. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
CLA v. State of Ga.
green
2 sentences2003Citing C.L.A. v. State of Ga., 137 Ga.App. 511 (1), 224 S.E.2d 491 (1976), the appellant challenges this evidentiary ruling as error, contending that a transfer hearing "may not, as a matter of law, be treated as similar to a probable cause hearing." We disagree. "[T]he pronouncement in C.L.A. v. State of Ga., supra, that a transfer hearing is [different] [3] from a preliminary detention hearing does not mean that a higher standard of proof that the child committed the delinquent act is required in a transfer hearing." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) In re R.B., 264 Ga. 602, 603 (1), 448 S 2003Citing C.L.A. v. State of Ga., 137 Ga.App. 511 (1), 224 S.E.2d 491 (1976), the appellant challenges this evidentiary ruling as error, contending that a transfer hearing "may not, as a matter of law, be treated as similar to a probable cause hearing." We disagree. "[T]he pronouncement in C.L.A. v. State of Ga., supra, that a transfer hearing is [different] [3] from a preliminary detention hearing does not mean that a higher standard of proof that the child committed the delinquent act is required in a transfer hearing." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) In re R.B., 264 Ga. 602, 603 (1), 448 S | 4 | 1989–2003 |
Kent v. United States
green
2 sentences1972These dealt with adults and therefore should not be construed as ruling that the detention hearing required by our Juvenile Court Code may be dispensed with, particularly in view of Kent v. United States, 383 U. S. 541 (86 SC 1045,16 LE2d 84). 1972These dealt with adults and therefore should not be construed as ruling that the detention hearing required by our Juvenile Court Code may be dispensed with, particularly in view of Kent v. United States, 383 U. S. 541 (86 SC 1045,16 LE2d 84). | 3 | 1972–1972 |
In re R. B.
green
2 sentences2003Citing C.L.A. v. State of Ga., 137 Ga.App. 511 (1), 224 S.E.2d 491 (1976), the appellant challenges this evidentiary ruling as error, contending that a transfer hearing "may not, as a matter of law, be treated as similar to a probable cause hearing." We disagree. "[T]he pronouncement in C.L.A. v. State of Ga., supra, that a transfer hearing is [different] [3] from a preliminary detention hearing does not mean that a higher standard of proof that the child committed the delinquent act is required in a transfer hearing." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) In re R.B., 264 Ga. 602, 603 (1), 448 S 2003In re R.B., 264 Ga. 602, 603 (1), 448 S.E.2d 690 (1994); see also OCGA § 15-11-30.2(a)(3)(B), (C). | 2 | 2003–2003 |
Livingston v. State
green
2 sentences2016Cf. Livingston v. State, 266 Ga. 501 ( 467 SE2d 886 ) (1996) (holding under provision of former Juvenile Code that when the 72-hour period expired on a holiday or weekend the detention hearing should be held on the next business day, detention hearing held at 9:00 a.m. 2016Cf. Livingston v. State, 266 Ga. 501 ( 467 SE2d 886 ) (1996) (holding under provision of former Juvenile Code that when the 72-hour period expired on a holiday or weekend the detention hearing should be held on the next business day, detention hearing held at 9:00 a.m. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
In Re Kc
green
1 sentence2016C., 290 Ga. App. 416, 417 ( 659 SE2d 821 ) (2008) (“The juvenile court procedures do not implicate the merits of a delinquency petition, and their violation does not demand an acquittal. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
In re B. A. P.
green
2 sentences1991A. P., 180 Ga. App. 433 (1) ( 349 SE2d 218 ) (1986), we considered the similar question of whether within 72 hours of a detention hearing the State must bring forth charges on all crimes and offenses a juvenile may have committed up to that date or forever waive them. 1991A. P., 180 Ga. App. 433 (1) ( 349 SE2d 218 ) (1986), we considered the similar question of whether within 72 hours of a detention hearing the State must bring forth charges on all crimes and offenses a juvenile may have committed up to that date or forever waive them. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Stynchcombe v. Hardy
green
2 sentences1975Under decisions exemplified by Stynchcombe v. Hardy, 228 Ga. 130 ( 184 SE2d 356 ), the legality of such confinement may be tested by habeas corpus petition. 1975Under decisions exemplified by Stynchcombe v. Hardy, 228 Ga. 130 ( 184 SE2d 356 ), the legality of such confinement may be tested by habeas corpus petition. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
In Re GAULT
green
1 sentence1972The duty of a committing court "is simply to determine whether there is sufficient reason to suspect the guilt of the accused, to require him to appear and answer before the court competent to try him; and whenever such probable cause exists, it is the duty of the court to commit." Code § 27-407. *274 The new Juvenile Code obviously intends that procedural due process requirements established by In re Gault, 387 U. S. 1 (87 SC 1428, 18 LE2d 527) (1967) be observed. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
McKeiver v. Pennsylvania
green
1 sentence1972These dealt with adults and therefore should not be construed as ruling that the detention hearing required by our Juvenile Court Code may be dispensed with, particularly in view of Kent v. United States, 383 U. S. 541 (86 SC 1045, 16 LE2d 84). [4] A decision that a child is deprived, or following a finding of delinquent or unruly conduct that he is in need of supervision, treatment or rehabilitation requires only "clear and convincing evidence." Code Ann. § 24A-2201 (c). [5] In McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, 403 U. S. 528 (91 SC 1976, 29 LE2d 647) (1971), the Supreme Court ruled there is no consti | 1 | 1972–1972 |
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.