10 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 2002–2025 5 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 |
|---|---|---|
Jackson v. Virginiared2 sentences2025Tucker contends that the trial court failed to meet its obliga- tions under OCGA § 5-5-20, which authorizes a trial court to grant a new trial “[i]n any case when the verdict of a jury is found contrary to evidence and the principles of justice and equity.” On appeal from 4 Although Tucker makes a passing reference to the federal due process standard for sufficiency, see Jackson v. Virginia, 443 US 307 (1979), he has not offered any argument that the evidence was not sufficient under that standard and instead focuses on the contention that the State did not exclude every rea- sonable hypothesi 2020See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307, 319 ( 99 SCt 2781 , 61 LE2d 560) (1979). | 3 | 4 |
State v. Hollandgreen2 sentences2024See, e.g., State v. Holland, 308 Ga. 412, 413 n.3 (841 SE2d 723) (2020) (declining to consider whether Georgia constitutional due process clause provides a rule substantively different from federal due process clause where parties made no argument they should be applied differently). 9 obtain a new trial where (1) all or an important part of the transcript is lost or materially inadequate or (2) when the verbatim transcript is missing only one or a few parts of trial and he has been specifically has been specifically harmed by the omission). 2024See, e.g., State v. Holland, 308 Ga. 412, 413 n.3 (841 SE2d 723) (2020) (declining to consider whether Georgia constitutional due process clause provides a rule substantively different from federal due process clause where parties made no argument they should be applied differently). 9 obtain a new trial where (1) all or an important part of the transcript is lost or materially inadequate or (2) when the verbatim transcript is missing only one or a few parts of trial and he has been specifically has been specifically harmed by the omission). | 1 | 1 |
Cooper v. Rollinsgreen2 sentences2023See, e.g., Cooper, 152 Ga. at 591 (“What such regulation shall be, and to what particular trade or business such regulation shall apply, are questions for the state to determine, and their determination comes within the proper exercise of the police power of the state”; there must be “clear and palpable” conflict before “an act of the legislature will be declared unconstitutional”); Bramley, 187 Ga. at 832 (referencing the “duty of sustaining [an] act 11 None of our prior cases resolving state due process challenges to occupational licensing statutes expressly adopted the federal due process t 2023See, e.g., Cooper, 152 Ga. at 591 (“What such regulation shall be, and to what particular trade or business such regulation shall apply, are questions for the State to determine, and their determination comes within the proper exercise of the police power of the State”; there must be “clear and palpable” conflict before “an act of the legislature will be declared unconstitutional”); Bramley, 187 Ga. at 832 (referencing the “duty of sustaining [an] act 11 None of our prior cases resolving state due process challenges to occupational licensing statutes expressly adopted the federal due process t | 1 | 1 |
Bramley v. Stategreen2 sentences2023See, e.g., Cooper, 152 Ga. at 591 (“What such regulation shall be, and to what particular trade or business such regulation shall apply, are questions for the state to determine, and their determination comes within the proper exercise of the police power of the state”; there must be “clear and palpable” conflict before “an act of the legislature will be declared unconstitutional”); Bramley, 187 Ga. at 832 (referencing the “duty of sustaining [an] act 11 None of our prior cases resolving state due process challenges to occupational licensing statutes expressly adopted the federal due process t 2023See, e.g., Cooper, 152 Ga. at 591 (“What such regulation shall be, and to what particular trade or business such regulation shall apply, are questions for the State to determine, and their determination comes within the proper exercise of the police power of the State”; there must be “clear and palpable” conflict before “an act of the legislature will be declared unconstitutional”); Bramley, 187 Ga. at 832 (referencing the “duty of sustaining [an] act 11 None of our prior cases resolving state due process challenges to occupational licensing statutes expressly adopted the federal due process t | 1 | 1 |
Oubre v. Woldemichaelgreen2 sentences2022However, although Oubre indicated that the use of aggressive interrogation methods, including providing a hope of benefit, may be the “most significant[]” factor in 35 the Riley analysis, Oubre, 301 Ga. at 306, it did so while considering the Riley factors in the context of a federal due process analysis, rather than whether the juvenile defendant had voluntarily waived his rights under Miranda, which is at issue in this appeal. 2022However, although Oubre indicated that the use of aggressive interrogation methods, including providing a hope of benefit, may be the “most significant[ ]” factor in 35 the Riley analysis, id. at 306 (2) (a), it did so while considering the Riley factors in the context of a federal due process analysis, rather than whether the juvenile defendant had voluntarily waived his rights under Miranda, which is at issue in this appeal. | 1 | 1 |
Boatright v. Glynn County School Districtgreen2 sentences2021Boatright v. Glynn County School Dist., 315 Ga. App. 468, 470 (1) ( 726 SE2d 591 ) (2012). 2021Boatright v. Glynn County School Dist., 315 Ga. App. 468, 470 (1) ( 726 SE2d 591 ) (2012). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Camden County v. Haddock
green
2 sentences2010In Camden County v. Haddock, 271 Ga. 664 ( 523 SE2d 291 ) (1999), this Court stated: We interpret the due process clause under our State Constitution as providing the same procedural rights in public employment cases as the federal due process clause. 2010In Camden County v. Haddock, 271 Ga. 664 ( 523 SE2d 291 ) (1999), this Court stated: We interpret the due process clause under our State Constitution as providing the same procedural rights in public employment cases as the federal due process clause. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore
green
1 sentence2002When an appellant has properly raised a federal due process claim, the reviewing court must apply the three “guideposts” 4 set out in BMW of North America v. Gore, 517 U. S. 559 (116 SC 1589, 134 LE2d 809) (1996) (“Gore”), in its de novo review of whether the award of punitive damages is grossly excessive. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc.
green
1 sentence2002Leatherman, 532 U. S. at 440 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
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.
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.