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 1 courts 1978–2026 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Nicely v. Stategreen2 sentences2013Compare Nicely v. State, 305 Ga. App. 387, 390 (1) ( 699 SE2d 774 ) (2010) (reversing denial of double jeopardy plea in bar as to two crimes arising from the same conduct). (b) Pruiett’s prosecution for the three drugs other than Xanax found at her home does not violate the procedural double jeopardy bar because the second prosecution on those charges meets none of the scenarios laid out in OCGA §§ 16-1-7 (b) and 16-1-8 (b) (1). 2013Compare Nicely v. State, 305 Ga. App. 387, 390 (1) ( 699 SE2d 774 ) (2010) (reversing denial of double jeopardy plea in bar as to two crimes arising from the same conduct). (b) Pruiett’s prosecution for the three drugs other than Xanax found at her home does not violate the procedural double jeopardy bar because the second prosecution on those charges meets none of the scenarios laid out in OCGA §§ 16-1-7 (b) and 16-1-8 (b) (1). | 2 | 2 |
Prater v. Stategreen2 sentences2026See Prater v. State, 273 Ga. 477 , 481–82(4) ( 545 SE2d 864 ) (2001). 2. 2026See Prater v. State, 273 Ga. 477 , 481–82(4) ( 545 SE2d 864 ) (2001). 2. | 1 | 1 |
Dresbach v. Stategreen1 sentence2023“The doctrine of double jeopardy has two components: the ‘procedural’ bar on double jeopardy, which places limitations on multiple prosecutions for crimes arising from the same conduct, and the ‘substantive’ bar, which protects against multiple convictions or punishments for such crimes.”14 To the extent that Gilmore raises a procedural double jeopardy claim, he waived it by failing to raise it in a plea in bar.15 Moreover, such claim is inapplicable 13 See Dresbach, 308 Ga. at 425 (2). 14 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Williams v. State, 307 Ga. 778, 779 (1) ( 838 SE2d 235 ) (2020). 15 | 1 | 1 |
Williams v. Stategreen2 sentences2023“The doctrine of double jeopardy has two components: the ‘procedural’ bar on double jeopardy, which places limitations on multiple prosecutions for crimes arising from the same conduct, and the ‘substantive’ bar, which protects against multiple convictions or punishments for such crimes.”14 To the extent that Gilmore raises a procedural double jeopardy claim, he waived it by failing to raise it in a plea in bar.15 Moreover, such claim is inapplicable 13 See Dresbach, 308 Ga. at 425 (2). 14 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Williams v. State, 307 Ga. 778, 779 (1) ( 838 SE2d 235 ) (2020). 15 2023“The doctrine of double jeopardy has two components: the ‘procedural’ bar on double jeopardy, which places limitations on multiple prosecutions for crimes arising from the same conduct, and the ‘substantive’ bar, which protects against multiple convictions or punishments for such crimes.”14 To the extent that Gilmore raises a procedural double jeopardy claim, he waived it by failing to raise it in a plea in bar.15 Moreover, such claim is inapplicable 13 See Dresbach, 308 Ga. at 425 (2). 14 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Williams v. State, 307 Ga. 778, 779 (1) ( 838 SE2d 235 ) (2020). 15 | 1 | 1 |
Kathryn Schrader v. Stategreen2 sentences2023“The doctrine of double jeopardy has two components: the ‘procedural’ bar on double jeopardy, which places limitations on multiple prosecutions for crimes arising from the same conduct, and the ‘substantive’ bar, which protects against multiple convictions or punishments for such crimes.”14 To the extent that Gilmore raises a procedural double jeopardy claim, he waived it by failing to raise it in a plea in bar.15 Moreover, such claim is inapplicable 13 See Dresbach, 308 Ga. at 425 (2). 14 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Williams v. State, 307 Ga. 778, 779 (1) ( 838 SE2d 235 ) (2020). 15 2023“The doctrine of double jeopardy has two components: the ‘procedural’ bar on double jeopardy, which places limitations on multiple prosecutions for crimes arising from the same conduct, and the ‘substantive’ bar, which protects against multiple convictions or punishments for such crimes.”14 To the extent that Gilmore raises a procedural double jeopardy claim, he waived it by failing to raise it in a plea in bar.15 Moreover, such claim is inapplicable 13 See Dresbach, 308 Ga. at 425 (2). 14 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Williams v. State, 307 Ga. 778, 779 (1) ( 838 SE2d 235 ) (2020). 15 | 1 | 1 |
Hill v. Stategreen2 sentences1999Hill v. State, 234 Ga. App. 173, 175 ( 507 SE2d 3 ) (1998). *136 Honea contends that when the state court prosecuting officer (the solicitor general) commenced the theft by receiving prosecution in the state court, he knew of the facts which supported the felony theft by receiving charge subsequently brought in the superior court accusation. 1999Hill v. State, 234 Ga. App. 173, 175 ( 507 SE2d 3 ) (1998). *136 Honea contends that when the state court prosecuting officer (the solicitor general) commenced the theft by receiving prosecution in the state court, he knew of the facts which supported the felony theft by receiving charge subsequently brought in the superior court accusation. | 1 | 1 |
Ely v. Stategreen2 sentences1997Ely v. State, 192 Ga. App. 203, 205 (4) ( 384 SE2d 268 ) (1989). 1997Ely v. State, 192 Ga. App. 203, 205 (4) ( 384 SE2d 268 ) (1989). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Herrington v. State
green
2 sentences2023While the trial court noted that counsel cited Herrington v. State, 315 Ga. App. 101 ( 726 SE2d 625 ) (2012) (physical precedent only), to support his procedural double jeopardy argument, it appears that the only 14 reference to that case on the record was made by the trial court. 2023While the trial court noted that counsel cited Herrington v. State, 315 Ga. App. 101 ( 726 SE2d 625 ) (2012) (physical precedent only), to support his procedural double jeopardy argument, it appears that the only 14 reference to that case on the record was made by the trial court. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Barlowe v. State
green
2 sentences2011Barlowe v. State, 286 Ga. App. 133 ( 648 SE2d 471 ) (2007). 2011Barlowe v. State, 286 Ga. App. 133 ( 648 SE2d 471 ) (2007). | 1 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Stowe
green
2 sentences1985State v. Stowe, 167 Ga. App. 65 (2) ( 306 SE2d 663 ) (1983). 1985State v. Stowe, 167 Ga. App. 65 (2) ( 306 SE2d 663 ) (1983). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
State v. Brittain
green
1 sentence1983Having elected to proceed with the remaining offense, the state is barred from trial on the dismissed offense by virtue of the doctrine of procedural double jeopardy." The Brittain case, 147 Ga. App. 626 , supra, is controlling here. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
State v. Gilder
green
2 sentences1978State v. Gilder, 145 Ga. App. 731 ( 245 SE2d 3 ). 1978State v. Gilder, 145 Ga. App. 731 ( 245 SE2d 3 ). | 1 | 1978–1978 |
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.