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.
11 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 2012–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
Booker v. Stategreen2 sentences2021Such plain error may be considered on appeal even if it was not brought to the court’s attention as provided in subsection (a) of this Code section.”); Weyer v. State, 333 Ga. App. 706, 714 (2) ( 776 SE2d 304 ) (2015) (“[B]ecause [the defendant] did not object to the trial court’s supplemental instructions, we review the instructions only for plain error.”); Booker v. State, 322 Ga. App. 257, 260 (2) ( 744 SE2d 429 ) (2013) (“Because [the defendant] did not object to the jury charge regarding malice murder and felony murder, we review the charge only for plain error.”). 14 Booker, 322 Ga. App. 2021Such plain error may be considered on appeal even if it was not brought to the court’s attention as provided in subsection (a) of this Code section.”); Weyer v. State, 333 Ga. App. 706, 714 (2) ( 776 SE2d 304 ) (2015) (“[B]ecause [the defendant] did not object to the trial court’s supplemental instructions, we review the instructions only for plain error.”); Booker v. State, 322 Ga. App. 257, 260 (2) ( 744 SE2d 429 ) (2013) (“Because [the defendant] did not object to the jury charge regarding malice murder and felony murder, we review the charge only for plain error.”). 14 Booker, 322 Ga. App. | 3 | 3 |
State v. Kellygreen2 sentences2017See OCGA § 17-8-58 (b); State v. Kelly, 290 Ga. 29, 33 ( 718 SE2d 232 ) (2011). 2017See OCGA § 17-8-58 (b); State v. Kelly, 290 Ga. 29, 33 ( 718 SE2d 232 ) (2011). | 3 | 3 |
Kegler v. Stategreen2 sentences2013See OCGA § 17-8-58 (b); Kegler v. State, 317 Ga. App. 427, 434 (3) ( 731 SE2d 111 ) (2012). 2013See OCGA § 17-8-58 (b); Kegler v. State, 317 Ga. App. 427, 434 (3) ( 731 SE2d 111 ) (2012). | 2 | 2 |
White v. Stategreen2 sentences2012See Alatise v. State, 291 Ga. 428, 429 (2) ( 728 SE2d 592 ) (2012); White v. State, 291 Ga. 7, 8 (2) ( 727 SE2d 109 ) (2012). 2012See Alatise v. State, 291 Ga. 428, 429 (2) ( 728 SE2d 592 ) (2012); White v. State, 291 Ga. 7, 8 (2) ( 727 SE2d 109 ) (2012). | 2 | 2 |
Weyer v. Stategreen2 sentences2021Such plain error may be considered on appeal even if it was not brought to the court’s attention as provided in subsection (a) of this Code section.”); Weyer v. State, 333 Ga. App. 706, 714 (2) ( 776 SE2d 304 ) (2015) (“[B]ecause [the defendant] did not object to the trial court’s supplemental instructions, we review the instructions only for plain error.”); Booker v. State, 322 Ga. App. 257, 260 (2) ( 744 SE2d 429 ) (2013) (“Because [the defendant] did not object to the jury charge regarding malice murder and felony murder, we review the charge only for plain error.”). 14 Booker, 322 Ga. App. 2021Such plain error may be considered on appeal even if it was not brought to the court’s attention as provided in subsection (a) of this Code section.”); Weyer v. State, 333 Ga. App. 706, 714 (2) ( 776 SE2d 304 ) (2015) (“[B]ecause [the defendant] did not object to the trial court’s supplemental instructions, we review the instructions only for plain error.”); Booker v. State, 322 Ga. App. 257, 260 (2) ( 744 SE2d 429 ) (2013) (“Because [the defendant] did not object to the jury charge regarding malice murder and felony murder, we review the charge only for plain error.”). 14 Booker, 322 Ga. App. | 1 | 1 |
Wilkes v. Stategreen2 sentences2013To prove that the failure to give the charge was plain error, [Fouts] must show that a four-pronged test has 2 “Criminal negligence as used in the statutes of this State means . . . reckless and wanton negligence and of such a character as to show an utter disregard for the safety of others who might reasonably be expected to be injured thereby.” (Footnote omitted.) Wilkes v. State, 254 Ga. App. 447, 449-450 ( 562 SE2d 519 ) (2002). 6 been met: the omission of the charge was erroneous[;] the error was obvious[;] the omission of the charge likely affected the outcome of the proceedings[;] and t 2013To prove that the failure to give the charge was plain error, [Fouts] must show that a four-pronged test has 2 “Criminal negligence as used in the statutes of this State means . . . reckless and wanton negligence and of such a character as to show an utter disregard for the safety of others who might reasonably be expected to be injured thereby.” (Footnote omitted.) Wilkes v. State, 254 Ga. App. 447, 449-450 ( 562 SE2d 519 ) (2002). 6 been met: the omission of the charge was erroneous[;] the error was obvious[;] the omission of the charge likely affected the outcome of the proceedings[;] and t | 1 | 1 |
Alatise v. Stategreen2 sentences2012See Alatise v. State, 291 Ga. 428, 429 (2) ( 728 SE2d 592 ) (2012); White v. State, 291 Ga. 7, 8 (2) ( 727 SE2d 109 ) (2012). 2012See Alatise v. State, 291 Ga. 428, 429 (2) ( 728 SE2d 592 ) (2012); White v. State, 291 Ga. 7, 8 (2) ( 727 SE2d 109 ) (2012). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.