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 1907–2009 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Burks v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See, e.g., Burks v. State, 246 Ga. App. 22, 25-26 (2) ( 538 SE2d 769 ) (2000); Cornish v. State, 219 Ga. App. 884, 885 (1) ( 466 SE2d 919 ) (1996); Newsome v. State, 217 Ga. App. 379, 381 ( 457 SE2d 232 ) (1995); Ellerbee v. State, 215 Ga. App. 102, 104 (4) ( 449 SE2d 874 ) (1994). 2009See, e.g., Burks v. State, 246 Ga. App. 22, 25-26 (2) ( 538 SE2d 769 ) (2000); Cornish v. State, 219 Ga. App. 884, 885 (1) ( 466 SE2d 919 ) (1996); Newsome v. State, 217 Ga. App. 379, 381 ( 457 SE2d 232 ) (1995); Ellerbee v. State, 215 Ga. App. 102, 104 (4) ( 449 SE2d 874 ) (1994). | 2 | 2 |
Newsome v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See, e.g., Burks v. State, 246 Ga. App. 22, 25-26 (2) ( 538 SE2d 769 ) (2000); Cornish v. State, 219 Ga. App. 884, 885 (1) ( 466 SE2d 919 ) (1996); Newsome v. State, 217 Ga. App. 379, 381 ( 457 SE2d 232 ) (1995); Ellerbee v. State, 215 Ga. App. 102, 104 (4) ( 449 SE2d 874 ) (1994). 2009See, e.g., Burks v. State, 246 Ga. App. 22, 25-26 (2) ( 538 SE2d 769 ) (2000); Cornish v. State, 219 Ga. App. 884, 885 (1) ( 466 SE2d 919 ) (1996); Newsome v. State, 217 Ga. App. 379, 381 ( 457 SE2d 232 ) (1995); Ellerbee v. State, 215 Ga. App. 102, 104 (4) ( 449 SE2d 874 ) (1994). | 2 | 2 |
Cornish v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See, e.g., Burks v. State, 246 Ga. App. 22, 25-26 (2) ( 538 SE2d 769 ) (2000); Cornish v. State, 219 Ga. App. 884, 885 (1) ( 466 SE2d 919 ) (1996); Newsome v. State, 217 Ga. App. 379, 381 ( 457 SE2d 232 ) (1995); Ellerbee v. State, 215 Ga. App. 102, 104 (4) ( 449 SE2d 874 ) (1994). 2009See, e.g., Burks v. State, 246 Ga. App. 22, 25-26 (2) ( 538 SE2d 769 ) (2000); Cornish v. State, 219 Ga. App. 884, 885 (1) ( 466 SE2d 919 ) (1996); Newsome v. State, 217 Ga. App. 379, 381 ( 457 SE2d 232 ) (1995); Ellerbee v. State, 215 Ga. App. 102, 104 (4) ( 449 SE2d 874 ) (1994). | 2 | 2 |
Ellerbee v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See, e.g., Burks v. State, 246 Ga. App. 22, 25-26 (2) ( 538 SE2d 769 ) (2000); Cornish v. State, 219 Ga. App. 884, 885 (1) ( 466 SE2d 919 ) (1996); Newsome v. State, 217 Ga. App. 379, 381 ( 457 SE2d 232 ) (1995); Ellerbee v. State, 215 Ga. App. 102, 104 (4) ( 449 SE2d 874 ) (1994). 2009See, e.g., Burks v. State, 246 Ga. App. 22, 25-26 (2) ( 538 SE2d 769 ) (2000); Cornish v. State, 219 Ga. App. 884, 885 (1) ( 466 SE2d 919 ) (1996); Newsome v. State, 217 Ga. App. 379, 381 ( 457 SE2d 232 ) (1995); Ellerbee v. State, 215 Ga. App. 102, 104 (4) ( 449 SE2d 874 ) (1994). | 2 | 2 |
Gravitt v. Stategreen2 sentences1977Also, the Supreme Court in Gravitt v. State, 220 Ga. 781, 783, 784 (2) ( 141 SE2d 893 ) (1965) refused to reverse a conviction against a similar challenge. 1977Also, the Supreme Court in Gravitt v. State, 220 Ga. 781, 783, 784 (2) ( 141 SE2d 893 ) (1965) refused to reverse a conviction against a similar challenge. | 1 | 2 |
Sultenfuss v. Stategreen2 sentences1996This issue is controlled adversely to Mitchell by Sultenfuss v. State, 185 Ga. App. 47, 49 (5) ( 363 SE2d 337 ) (1987), wherein we determined that this charge was not reversible error because there was no such evidence introduced which the jury could use to impeach the defendant. 1996This issue is controlled adversely to Mitchell by Sultenfuss v. State, 185 Ga. App. 47, 49 (5) ( 363 SE2d 337 ) (1987), wherein we determined that this charge was not reversible error because there was no such evidence introduced which the jury could use to impeach the defendant. | 1 | 1 |
Vance v. Stategreen2 sentences1994See Vance v. State, 262 Ga. 236 (2) ( 416 SE2d 516 ); Oliver v. State, 207 Ga. App. 681 (2) ( 428 SE2d 681 ). 5. 1994See Vance v. State, 262 Ga. 236 (2) ( 416 SE2d 516 ); Oliver v. State, 207 Ga. App. 681 (2) ( 428 SE2d 681 ). 5. | 1 | 1 |
Blocker v. Stategreen2 sentences1940Of all of this, however, the jury will be the judge.” (Italics ours.) The writer, speaking for himself, feels it is his duty to reiterate what he said in Blocker v. State, 57 Ga. App. 330, 331 ( 195 S. E. 451 ): “Such a charge is likely to confuse the jury, for they are likely to construe it as conveying the idea that the law raises a presumption of guilt from the recent possession, that the defendant committed the offense of simple larceny. ‘The law raises no presumption; it simply permits the jury to infer guilt from the fact of recent possession, unaccounted for.’ Lewis v. State, 120 Ga. 50 1940Of all of this, however, the jury will be the judge.” (Italics ours.) The writer, speaking for himself, feels it is his duty to reiterate what he said in Blocker v. State, 57 Ga. App. 330, 331 ( 195 S. E. 451 ): “Such a charge is likely to confuse the jury, for they are likely to construe it as conveying the idea that the law raises a presumption of guilt from the recent possession, that the defendant committed the offense of simple larceny. ‘The law raises no presumption; it simply permits the jury to infer guilt from the fact of recent possession, unaccounted for.’ Lewis v. State, 120 Ga. 50 | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Oliver v. State
green
2 sentences1994See Vance v. State, 262 Ga. 236 (2) ( 416 SE2d 516 ); Oliver v. State, 207 Ga. App. 681 (2) ( 428 SE2d 681 ). 5. 1994See Vance v. State, 262 Ga. 236 (2) ( 416 SE2d 516 ); Oliver v. State, 207 Ga. App. 681 (2) ( 428 SE2d 681 ). 5. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Minter v. Leary
green
2 sentences1989The court, relying on Minter v. Leary, 181 Ga. App. 801 (1) ( 354 SE2d 185 ) (1987), reasoned that, as the jury ruled against Mathis on the issue of liability, any error in a charge on damages had to be harmless. 1989The court, relying on Minter v. Leary, 181 Ga. App. 801 (1) ( 354 SE2d 185 ) (1987), reasoned that, as the jury ruled against Mathis on the issue of liability, any error in a charge on damages had to be harmless. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Graham v. State
neutral
1 sentence1940Of all of this, however, the jury will be the judge.” (Italics ours.) The writer, speaking for himself, feels it is his duty to reiterate what he said in Blocker v. State, 57 Ga. App. 330, 331 ( 195 S. E. 451 ): “Such a charge is likely to confuse the jury, for they are likely to construe it as conveying the idea that the law raises a presumption of guilt from the recent possession, that the defendant committed the offense of simple larceny. ‘The law raises no presumption; it simply permits the jury to infer guilt from the fact of recent possession, unaccounted for.’ Lewis v. State, 120 Ga. 50 | 1 | 1940–1940 |
Lewis v. State
neutral
1 sentence1940Of all of this, however, the jury will be the judge.” (Italics ours.) The writer, speaking for himself, feels it is his duty to reiterate what he said in Blocker v. State, 57 Ga. App. 330, 331 ( 195 S. E. 451 ): “Such a charge is likely to confuse the jury, for they are likely to construe it as conveying the idea that the law raises a presumption of guilt from the recent possession, that the defendant committed the offense of simple larceny. ‘The law raises no presumption; it simply permits the jury to infer guilt from the fact of recent possession, unaccounted for.’ Lewis v. State, 120 Ga. 50 | 1 | 1940–1940 |
Harrison v. State
green
2 sentences1921The charge in the instant case is more nearly like the one excepted to in Harrison v. State, 83 Ga. 129 ( 9 S. E. 542 ), where the court, in charging upon the prisoner’s statement, said: “ What the law means by believing it in pref erence to the sworn testimony is, when the sworn testimony and the statement conflict in material matters; and material matters are those necessary to constitute the offense.” Chief Justice Bleckley, who wrote the opinion in the Harrison case, while criticising the trial judge for going outside of the statute in his charge upon the defendant’s statement, held, that 1921The charge in the instant case is more nearly like the one excepted to in Harrison v. State, 83 Ga. 129 ( 9 S. E. 542 ), where the court, in charging upon the prisoner’s statement, said: “ What the law means by believing it in pref erence to the sworn testimony is, when the sworn testimony and the statement conflict in material matters; and material matters are those necessary to constitute the offense.” Chief Justice Bleckley, who wrote the opinion in the Harrison case, while criticising the trial judge for going outside of the statute in his charge upon the defendant’s statement, held, that | 1 | 1921–1921 |
Yates v. State
green
2 sentences1907They further think that the evidence authorized a charge on both of these branches of the law, and that it appears from the record that the former decision in this case ( 127 Ga. 813 ( 56 S. E. 1017 ) ) was read in argument and commented on by counsel before the jury, which decision presented the theory of manslaughter; that the charge was not calculated to mislead the jury, and was not error merely because defendant’s counsel contended before the jury that the homicide was justifiable; and that the charge was not reversible error. 1907They further think that the evidence authorized a charge on both of these branches of the law, and that it appears from the record that the former decision in this case ( 127 Ga. 813 ( 56 S. E. 1017 ) ) was read in argument and commented on by counsel before the jury, which decision presented the theory of manslaughter; that the charge was not calculated to mislead the jury, and was not error merely because defendant’s counsel contended before the jury that the homicide was justifiable; and that the charge was not reversible error. | 1 | 1907–1907 |
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.