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.
10 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1979–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
Young v. Stategreen2 sentences1993Assuming error occurred, as enumerated, it was harmless as the stricken question and answer were merely cumulative in nature. “[E]vidence is harmless where admissible evidence of the same fact is before the jury.” Young v. State, 191 Ga. App. 651, 653 (2) ( 382 SE2d 642 ); compare Gaither v. State, 259 Ga. 200 (2) ( 378 SE2d 464 ); see also Sabel, supra. Judgment affirmed. 1993Assuming error occurred, as enumerated, it was harmless as the stricken question and answer were merely cumulative in nature. “[E]vidence is harmless where admissible evidence of the same fact is before the jury.” Young v. State, 191 Ga. App. 651, 653 (2) ( 382 SE2d 642 ); compare Gaither v. State, 259 Ga. 200 (2) ( 378 SE2d 464 ); see also Sabel, supra. Judgment affirmed. | 2 | 2 |
Morrell v. Stategreen2 sentences2024See Morrell v. State, 313 Ga. 247, 261 (2) (c) (869 SE2d 447) (2022) (“It is fundamental that harm as well as error 7 Indeed, “[d]emonstrative evidence implicates several provisions of the . . . 2024See Morrell v. State, 313 Ga. 247, 261 (2) (c) (869 SE2d 447) (2022) (“It is fundamental that harm as well as error 7 Indeed, “[d]emonstrative evidence implicates several provisions of the . . . | 1 | 1 |
Lester v. Stategreen2 sentences1994Assuming error occurred (compare Lester v. State, 75 Ga. App. 42, 59 (8) ( 42 SE2d 141 )), it was rendered harmless by the previously admitted evidence that appellant would have thrown the brick if anyone had walked up on him; the opinion testimony at issue is merely cumulative of testimony already in evidence. 1994Assuming error occurred (compare Lester v. State, 75 Ga. App. 42, 59 (8) ( 42 SE2d 141 )), it was rendered harmless by the previously admitted evidence that appellant would have thrown the brick if anyone had walked up on him; the opinion testimony at issue is merely cumulative of testimony already in evidence. | 1 | 1 |
Gaither v. Stategreen2 sentences1993Assuming error occurred, as enumerated, it was harmless as the stricken question and answer were merely cumulative in nature. “[E]vidence is harmless where admissible evidence of the same fact is before the jury.” Young v. State, 191 Ga. App. 651, 653 (2) ( 382 SE2d 642 ); compare Gaither v. State, 259 Ga. 200 (2) ( 378 SE2d 464 ); see also Sabel, supra. Judgment affirmed. 1993Assuming error occurred, as enumerated, it was harmless as the stricken question and answer were merely cumulative in nature. “[E]vidence is harmless where admissible evidence of the same fact is before the jury.” Young v. State, 191 Ga. App. 651, 653 (2) ( 382 SE2d 642 ); compare Gaither v. State, 259 Ga. 200 (2) ( 378 SE2d 464 ); see also Sabel, supra. Judgment affirmed. | 1 | 1 |
Sabel v. Stategreen1 sentence1993Assuming error occurred, as enumerated, it was harmless as the stricken question and answer were merely cumulative in nature. “[E]vidence is harmless where admissible evidence of the same fact is before the jury.” Young v. State, 191 Ga. App. 651, 653 (2) ( 382 SE2d 642 ); compare Gaither v. State, 259 Ga. 200 (2) ( 378 SE2d 464 ); see also Sabel, supra. Judgment affirmed. | 1 | 1 |
Croom v. Stategreen1 sentence1991Assuming defense counsel’s objection was sufficient to invoke a ruling by the trial court (but see Croom v. State, 165 Ga. App. 676, 677 (3) ( 302 SE2d 598 )), we find no error. | 1 | 1 |
Wendlandt v. Shepherd Construction Co.green2 sentences1987Co., 178 Ga. App. 153, 156 (3) ( 342 SE2d 352 ) (1986). 1987Co., 178 Ga. App. 153, 156 (3) ( 342 SE2d 352 ) (1986). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Wadegreen1 sentence1981See United States v. Wade, 388 U. S. 218, 227 (87 SC 1926, 18 LE2d 1149), stating that the taking of fingerprints is not a critical stage at which the accused is entitled to the presence of counsel. | 1 | 1 |
Long v. Stategreen2 sentences1979"In order to be entitled to a new trial on this ground, appellant must satisfy the court:' (1) that the evidence has come to his knowledge since the trial; (2) that it was not owing to the want of due diligence that he did not acquire it sooner; (3) that it is so material that it would probably produce a different verdict; (4) that it is not cumulative only; (5)... and (6) that a new trial will not be granted if the only effect of the evidence will be to impeach the credit of a witness. [Cit.]’ [Cit.] The 'newly discovered’ evidence in this case falls far short of meeting the above criteria.” 1979"In order to be entitled to a new trial on this ground, appellant must satisfy the court:' (1) that the evidence has come to his knowledge since the trial; (2) that it was not owing to the want of due diligence that he did not acquire it sooner; (3) that it is so material that it would probably produce a different verdict; (4) that it is not cumulative only; (5)... and (6) that a new trial will not be granted if the only effect of the evidence will be to impeach the credit of a witness. [Cit.]’ [Cit.] The 'newly discovered’ evidence in this case falls far short of meeting the above criteria.” | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Reno v. Reno
green
2 sentences2001Defense counsel made no objection or motion for a mistrial after the officer referred to “statements from the other two defendants.” Assuming defense counsel was not required to object or move for a mistrial to preserve a claim that the motion in limine order was violated (Reno v. Reno, 249 Ga. 855 ( 295 SE2d 94 ) (1982)), and further assuming that the claimed error was not induced by counsel’s question, we nevertheless conclude that the brief reference to the existence of the statements in this context was not error. 2001Defense counsel made no objection or motion for a mistrial after the officer referred to “statements from the other two defendants.” Assuming defense counsel was not required to object or move for a mistrial to preserve a claim that the motion in limine order was violated (Reno v. Reno, 249 Ga. 855 ( 295 SE2d 94 ) (1982)), and further assuming that the claimed error was not induced by counsel’s question, we nevertheless conclude that the brief reference to the existence of the statements in this context was not error. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Ellis v. State
green
2 sentences1987Ellis v. State, 67 Ga. App. 821 (6) ( 21 SE2d 316 ). 1987Ellis v. State, 67 Ga. App. 821 (6) ( 21 SE2d 316 ). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
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.