Hughes motion in Georgia

2013See OCGA § 40-5-55 (a). “[W]here the facts relevant to a suppression motion are undisputed, the proper standard of review on appeal is de novo, not clearly erroneous.” (Footnote omitted.) Underwood, supra. In State v. Gray, 267 Ga. App. 753 ( 600 SE2d 626 ) (2004), the case relied upon by the trial court in granting Hughes’s motion to suppress, we applied the clearly erroneous standard to affirm the trial court’s grant of a motion to suppress the results of the defendant’s breath test where the trial court found that the arresting officer lacked credibility and that the defendant’s outward man

2013See OCGA § 40-5-55 (a). “[W]here the facts relevant to a suppression motion are undisputed, the proper standard of review on appeal is de novo, not clearly erroneous.” (Footnote omitted.) Underwood, supra. In State v. Gray, 267 Ga. App. 753 ( 600 SE2d 626 ) (2004), the case relied upon by the trial court in granting Hughes’s motion to suppress, we applied the clearly erroneous standard to affirm the trial court’s grant of a motion to suppress the results of the defendant’s breath test where the trial court found that the arresting officer lacked credibility and that the defendant’s outward man

2025The State argues that, in similar cases, this Court has declined to remand 7 We note that at sentencing, although the trial court did not inquire directly about evidence in mitigation, it nonetheless “allowed [Hughes] to present evidence in mitigation[,]” Hatcher v. State, 224 Ga. App. 747, 751 (2) (b) ( 482 SE2d 443 ) (1997), indicating its willingness to consider such evidence in connection with probation or suspension of the maximum sentence.

2025The State argues that, in similar cases, this Court has declined to remand 7 We note that at sentencing, although the trial court did not inquire directly about evidence in mitigation, it nonetheless “allowed [Hughes] to present evidence in mitigation[,]” Hatcher v. State, 224 Ga. App. 747, 751 (2) (b) ( 482 SE2d 443 ) (1997), indicating its willingness to consider such evidence in connection with probation or suspension of the maximum sentence.

2022“A defendant is presumed to be sane,” Hudson v. State, 308 Ga. 443, 447 (2) (b) ( 841 SE2d 696 ) (2020), and “has the burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he was insane at the time the crime was committed.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) McElrath v. State, 308 Ga. 104, 106 (1) (b) ( 839 SE2d 573 ) (2020).

2022“A defendant is presumed to be sane,” Hudson v. State, 308 Ga. 443, 447 (2) (b) ( 841 SE2d 696 ) (2020), and “has the burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he was insane at the time the crime was committed.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) McElrath v. State, 308 Ga. 104, 106 (1) (b) ( 839 SE2d 573 ) (2020).

2022“A defendant is presumed to be sane,” Hudson v. State, 308 Ga. 443, 447 (2) (b) ( 841 SE2d 696 ) (2020), and “has the burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he was insane at the time the crime was committed.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) McElrath v. State, 308 Ga. 104, 106 (1) (b) ( 839 SE2d 573 ) (2020).

2022“A defendant is presumed to be sane,” Hudson v. State, 308 Ga. 443, 447 (2) (b) ( 841 SE2d 696 ) (2020), and “has the burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he was insane at the time the crime was committed.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) McElrath v. State, 308 Ga. 104, 106 (1) (b) ( 839 SE2d 573 ) (2020).

2021“Given (Hughes’s) generalized complaints regarding his witnesses without any real showing of harm to his defense, it cannot be said that the trial court erred in discounting his claims.” Brooks v. State, 285 Ga. 246, 248 (2) ( 674 SE2d 871 ) (2009) (citation and punctuation omitted).

2021“Given (Hughes’s) generalized complaints regarding his witnesses without any real showing of harm to his defense, it cannot be said that the trial court erred in discounting his claims.” Brooks v. State, 285 Ga. 246, 248 (2) ( 674 SE2d 871 ) (2009) (citation and punctuation omitted).

2021That decision is one left to the . . . state trial court under applicable state procedural [rules] as a matter of its discretion to control its docket.”); Krut v. Whitecap Housing Group, LLC, 268 Ga. App. 436, 443 (2) (c) ( 602 SE2d 201 ) (2004) (concluding, however, that trial courts are not required to stay the non-arbitrable claims pending arbitration “even where the result would be the possibly inefficient maintenance of separate proceedings in different forums.”) (citation omitted). 9 The Jhuns’ claims against the Hughes defendants in this case stem entirely from their status as employees

2021That decision is one left to the . . . state trial court under applicable state procedural [rules] as a matter of its discretion to control its docket.”); Krut v. Whitecap Housing Group, LLC, 268 Ga. App. 436, 443 (2) (c) ( 602 SE2d 201 ) (2004) (concluding, however, that trial courts are not required to stay the non-arbitrable claims pending arbitration “even where the result would be the possibly inefficient maintenance of separate proceedings in different forums.”) (citation omitted). 9 The Jhuns’ claims against the Hughes defendants in this case stem entirely from their status as employees

2019See id. at 218 (2); see also Roberts v. State, 286 Ga. 532, 532 ( 690 SE2d 150 ) (2010).

2019See id. at 218 (2); see also Roberts v. State, 286 Ga. 532, 532 ( 690 SE2d 150 ) (2010).

2019To the extent that Hughes’s motion could be construed as seeking to vacate or modify his convictions, “a petition to vacate or modify a judgment of conviction is not an appropriate remedy in a criminal case,” Harper, 286 Ga. at 218 (1), and any appeal from an order denying or dismissing such a motion must be dismissed.

2019See id. at 218 (2); see also Roberts v. State, 286 Ga. 532, 532 ( 690 SE2d 150 ) (2010).

2019See, e.g., Bonner v. State, 308 Ga. App. 827, 830 (2) ( 709 SE2d 358 ) (2011) (“The key question in determining whether a merger has occurred is whether the different offenses are proven with the same facts.”) (punctuation omitted).

2019See, e.g., Bonner v. State, 308 Ga. App. 827, 830 (2) ( 709 SE2d 358 ) (2011) (“The key question in determining whether a merger has occurred is whether the different offenses are proven with the same facts.”) (punctuation omitted).

2018The fact that [the driver] identified specific key elements of vehicles, people, their statements, and the items that were found in the car, led me to believe that those people were in fact in the vehicle." 7 See Reid v. State , 235 Ga. 378 , 379 (1), 219 S.E.2d 740 (1975) ("The decisions on what witnesses to call ... and all other strategic and tactical decisions are the exclusive province of the lawyer after consultation with his client.")

2018The fact that [the driver] identified specific key elements of vehicles, people, their statements, and the items that were found in the car, led me to believe that those people were in fact in the vehicle." 7 See Reid v. State , 235 Ga. 378 , 379 (1), 219 S.E.2d 740 (1975) ("The decisions on what witnesses to call ... and all other strategic and tactical decisions are the exclusive province of the lawyer after consultation with his client.")

2008See Beals v. State, 288 Ga. App. 815, 817 (2) ( 655 SE2d 687 ) (2007); Ross v. State, 192 Ga. App. 65, 66 (2) ( 383 SE2d 627 ) (1989).

2008See Beals v. State, 288 Ga. App. 815, 817 (2) ( 655 SE2d 687 ) (2007); Ross v. State, 192 Ga. App. 65, 66 (2) ( 383 SE2d 627 ) (1989).

2008See Beals v. State, 288 Ga. App. 815, 817 (2) ( 655 SE2d 687 ) (2007); Ross v. State, 192 Ga. App. 65, 66 (2) ( 383 SE2d 627 ) (1989).

2008See Beals v. State, 288 Ga. App. 815, 817 (2) ( 655 SE2d 687 ) (2007); Ross v. State, 192 Ga. App. 65, 66 (2) ( 383 SE2d 627 ) (1989).