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.
17 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1948–2022 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 |
|---|---|---|
Benefield v. Stategreen2 sentences1984“The extent of a rebuke and instruction is within the discretion of the court . . .” Benefield v. State, 140 Ga. App. 727 (3) ( 232 SE2d 89 ) (1976). 1984“The extent of a rebuke and instruction is within the discretion of the court . . .” Benefield v. State, 140 Ga. App. 727 (3) ( 232 SE2d 89 ) (1976). | 5 | 8 |
Horah v. Stategreen2 sentences1998And you are looking at facts in the evidence that you have observed during the trial in order to make a decision of guilt or innocence.” “The extent of a rebuke and instruction is within the discretion of the court, and when the improper remarks are cured by timely corrective action calculated to preserve the defendant’s right to a fair trial, then we cannot say that the court abused its discretion in refusing to grant a mistrial.” (Punctuation omitted.) Horah v. State, 173 Ga. App. 306, 309 (4) ( 325 SE2d 917 ) (1985). 5. 1998And you are looking at facts in the evidence that you have observed during the trial in order to make a decision of guilt or innocence.” “The extent of a rebuke and instruction is within the discretion of the court, and when the improper remarks are cured by timely corrective action calculated to preserve the defendant’s right to a fair trial, then we cannot say that the court abused its discretion in refusing to grant a mistrial.” (Punctuation omitted.) Horah v. State, 173 Ga. App. 306, 309 (4) ( 325 SE2d 917 ) (1985). 5. | 2 | 3 |
High v. Stategreen2 sentences1984White v. State, 159 Ga. App. 545 ( 284 SE2d 76 ) (1981); High v. State, 153 Ga. App. 729, 731 ( 266 SE2d 364 ) (1980). 1984White v. State, 159 Ga. App. 545 ( 284 SE2d 76 ) (1981); High v. State, 153 Ga. App. 729, 731 ( 266 SE2d 364 ) (1980). | 2 | 2 |
Payne v. Stategreen2 sentences2022Doyle, P. J., and Brown, J., concur. 18 See Payne v. State, 152 Ga. App. 471, 474 (4) ( 263 SE2d 251 ) (1979) (“The extent of a rebuke and instruction is within the discretion of the court, and when, as here, the improper question or remark is cured by timely corrective action calculated to preserve the defendant’s right to a fair trial, then we cannot say that the court abused its discretion in refusing to grant a mistrial.”) (citation and punctuation omitted). 19 See Norwood v. State, 252 Ga. 292, 294 (3) ( 313 SE2d 98 ) (1984). 12 2022Doyle, P. J., and Brown, J., concur. 18 See Payne v. State, 152 Ga. App. 471, 474 (4) ( 263 SE2d 251 ) (1979) (“The extent of a rebuke and instruction is within the discretion of the court, and when, as here, the improper question or remark is cured by timely corrective action calculated to preserve the defendant’s right to a fair trial, then we cannot say that the court abused its discretion in refusing to grant a mistrial.”) (citation and punctuation omitted). 19 See Norwood v. State, 252 Ga. 292, 294 (3) ( 313 SE2d 98 ) (1984). 12 | 1 | 1 |
Norwood v. Stategreen2 sentences2022Doyle, P. J., and Brown, J., concur. 18 See Payne v. State, 152 Ga. App. 471, 474 (4) ( 263 SE2d 251 ) (1979) (“The extent of a rebuke and instruction is within the discretion of the court, and when, as here, the improper question or remark is cured by timely corrective action calculated to preserve the defendant’s right to a fair trial, then we cannot say that the court abused its discretion in refusing to grant a mistrial.”) (citation and punctuation omitted). 19 See Norwood v. State, 252 Ga. 292, 294 (3) ( 313 SE2d 98 ) (1984). 12 2022Doyle, P. J., and Brown, J., concur. 18 See Payne v. State, 152 Ga. App. 471, 474 (4) ( 263 SE2d 251 ) (1979) (“The extent of a rebuke and instruction is within the discretion of the court, and when, as here, the improper question or remark is cured by timely corrective action calculated to preserve the defendant’s right to a fair trial, then we cannot say that the court abused its discretion in refusing to grant a mistrial.”) (citation and punctuation omitted). 19 See Norwood v. State, 252 Ga. 292, 294 (3) ( 313 SE2d 98 ) (1984). 12 | 1 | 1 |
Meaux v. Stategreen2 sentences1986See also Meaux v. State, 176 Ga. App. 345 (2) ( 335 SE2d 741 ). 1986See also Meaux v. State, 176 Ga. App. 345 (2) ( 335 SE2d 741 ). | 1 | 1 |
Collier v. Stategreen2 sentences1985“The extent of a rebuke and instruction is within the discretion of the court, and when . . . the improper remarks are cured by timely corrective action calculated to preserve the defendant’s right to a fair trial, then we cannot say that the court abused its discretion in refusing to grant a mistrial.” Collier v. State, 156 Ga. App. 413, 414 ( 274 SE2d 780 ) (1980). 1985“The extent of a rebuke and instruction is within the discretion of the court, and when . . . the improper remarks are cured by timely corrective action calculated to preserve the defendant’s right to a fair trial, then we cannot say that the court abused its discretion in refusing to grant a mistrial.” Collier v. State, 156 Ga. App. 413, 414 ( 274 SE2d 780 ) (1980). | 1 | 1 |
Patterson v. Stategreen2 sentences1980See also Patterson v. State, 239 Ga. 409 (2) ( 238 SE2d 2 ). 3. 1980See also Patterson v. State, 239 Ga. 409 (2) ( 238 SE2d 2 ). 3. | 1 | 1 |
Shy v. Stategreen2 sentences1976Code Ann. § 81-1009; Shy v. State, 234 Ga. 816, 824 (2) ( 218 SE2d 599 ); James v. State, 215 Ga. 213, 215 (4) (109 SE2d 735); Domingo v. State, 213 Ga. 24, 27 (4) ( 96 SE2d 896 ); Westbrooks v. State, 135 Ga. App. 807 (3) ( 218 SE2d 908 ). 1976Code Ann. § 81-1009; Shy v. State, 234 Ga. 816, 824 (2) ( 218 SE2d 599 ); James v. State, 215 Ga. 213, 215 (4) (109 SE2d 735); Domingo v. State, 213 Ga. 24, 27 (4) ( 96 SE2d 896 ); Westbrooks v. State, 135 Ga. App. 807 (3) ( 218 SE2d 908 ). | 1 | 1 |
James v. Stategreen2 sentences1976Code Ann. § 81-1009; Shy v. State, 234 Ga. 816, 824 (2) ( 218 SE2d 599 ); James v. State, 215 Ga. 213, 215 (4) (109 SE2d 735); Domingo v. State, 213 Ga. 24, 27 (4) ( 96 SE2d 896 ); Westbrooks v. State, 135 Ga. App. 807 (3) ( 218 SE2d 908 ). 1976Code Ann. § 81-1009; Shy v. State, 234 Ga. 816, 824 (2) ( 218 SE2d 599 ); James v. State, 215 Ga. 213, 215 (4) (109 SE2d 735); Domingo v. State, 213 Ga. 24, 27 (4) ( 96 SE2d 896 ); Westbrooks v. State, 135 Ga. App. 807 (3) ( 218 SE2d 908 ). | 1 | 1 |
Domingo v. Stategreen2 sentences1976Code Ann. § 81-1009; Shy v. State, 234 Ga. 816, 824 (2) ( 218 SE2d 599 ); James v. State, 215 Ga. 213, 215 (4) (109 SE2d 735); Domingo v. State, 213 Ga. 24, 27 (4) ( 96 SE2d 896 ); Westbrooks v. State, 135 Ga. App. 807 (3) ( 218 SE2d 908 ). 1976Code Ann. § 81-1009; Shy v. State, 234 Ga. 816, 824 (2) ( 218 SE2d 599 ); James v. State, 215 Ga. 213, 215 (4) (109 SE2d 735); Domingo v. State, 213 Ga. 24, 27 (4) ( 96 SE2d 896 ); Westbrooks v. State, 135 Ga. App. 807 (3) ( 218 SE2d 908 ). | 1 | 1 |
Hicks v. Stategreen2 sentences1948R. 752); Morris & Co. v. Maddox, 97 Ga. 575, 581 ( 25 S. E. 487 ); Hicks v. State, 196 Ga. 671, 673 ( 27 S. E. 2d, 307 ). 1948R. 752); Morris & Co. v. Maddox, 97 Ga. 575, 581 ( 25 S. E. 487 ); Hicks v. State, 196 Ga. 671, 673 ( 27 S. E. 2d, 307 ). | 1 | 1 |
Morris & Co. v. Maddoxgreen2 sentences1948R. 752); Morris & Co. v. Maddox, 97 Ga. 575, 581 ( 25 S. E. 487 ); Hicks v. State, 196 Ga. 671, 673 ( 27 S. E. 2d, 307 ). 1948R. 752); Morris & Co. v. Maddox, 97 Ga. 575, 581 ( 25 S. E. 487 ); Hicks v. State, 196 Ga. 671, 673 ( 27 S. E. 2d, 307 ). | 1 | 1 |
Brooks v. Stategreen2 sentences1948“The circumstances of the case are such that the rebuke and instruction are insufficient to remove the improper impression.” Georgia Power Co. v. Puckett, 181 Ga. 386, 395 ( 182 S. E. 384 ); Brooks v. State, 183 Ga. 466, 469 ( 188 S. E. 711 , 108 A. L. 1948“The circumstances of the case are such that the rebuke and instruction are insufficient to remove the improper impression.” Georgia Power Co. v. Puckett, 181 Ga. 386, 395 ( 182 S. E. 384 ); Brooks v. State, 183 Ga. 466, 469 ( 188 S. E. 711 , 108 A. L. | 1 | 1 |
Georgia Power Co. v. Puckettgreen2 sentences1948“The circumstances of the case are such that the rebuke and instruction are insufficient to remove the improper impression.” Georgia Power Co. v. Puckett, 181 Ga. 386, 395 ( 182 S. E. 384 ); Brooks v. State, 183 Ga. 466, 469 ( 188 S. E. 711 , 108 A. L. 1948“The circumstances of the case are such that the rebuke and instruction are insufficient to remove the improper impression.” Georgia Power Co. v. Puckett, 181 Ga. 386, 395 ( 182 S. E. 384 ); Brooks v. State, 183 Ga. 466, 469 ( 188 S. E. 711 , 108 A. L. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
White v. State
green
2 sentences1984White v. State, 159 Ga. App. 545 ( 284 SE2d 76 ) (1981); High v. State, 153 Ga. App. 729, 731 ( 266 SE2d 364 ) (1980). 1984White v. State, 159 Ga. App. 545 ( 284 SE2d 76 ) (1981); High v. State, 153 Ga. App. 729, 731 ( 266 SE2d 364 ) (1980). | 2 | 1984–1984 |
Barrow v. State
green
2 sentences1981Code Ann. § 81-1009. . .” Benefield v. State, 140 Ga. App. 727, 730 ( 232 SE2d 89 ) (1976); Barrow v. State, 235 Ga. 635 (8) ( 221 SE2d 416 ) (1975). 1981Code Ann. § 81-1009. . .” Benefield v. State, 140 Ga. App. 727, 730 ( 232 SE2d 89 ) (1976); Barrow v. State, 235 Ga. 635 (8) ( 221 SE2d 416 ) (1975). | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Westbrooks v. State
neutral
2 sentences1976Code Ann. § 81-1009; Shy v. State, 234 Ga. 816, 824 (2) ( 218 SE2d 599 ); James v. State, 215 Ga. 213, 215 (4) (109 SE2d 735); Domingo v. State, 213 Ga. 24, 27 (4) ( 96 SE2d 896 ); Westbrooks v. State, 135 Ga. App. 807 (3) ( 218 SE2d 908 ). 1976Code Ann. § 81-1009; Shy v. State, 234 Ga. 816, 824 (2) ( 218 SE2d 599 ); James v. State, 215 Ga. 213, 215 (4) (109 SE2d 735); Domingo v. State, 213 Ga. 24, 27 (4) ( 96 SE2d 896 ); Westbrooks v. State, 135 Ga. App. 807 (3) ( 218 SE2d 908 ). | 1 | 1976–1976 |
James v. State
green
2 sentences1974And that statement was altogether out of order.” It is argued by the appellant that the rebuke to defense counsel accused him of dishonesty, and was thus prejudicial to the appellant, citing James v. State, 223 Ga. 677 (9) ( 157 SE2d 471 ). 1974And that statement was altogether out of order.” It is argued by the appellant that the rebuke to defense counsel accused him of dishonesty, and was thus prejudicial to the appellant, citing James v. State, 223 Ga. 677 (9) ( 157 SE2d 471 ). | 1 | 1974–1974 |
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.