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 2018–2025 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Brooks v. Stategreen2 sentences2025And that matters because “[e]vidence offered to prove identity must satisfy a particularly stringent analysis,” Brooks, 298 Ga. at 725 (citation omitted)—and because of the intersection between “plan” and identity in a Rule 404 (b) analysis, the stringent identity analysis also applies to an analysis of common plan or scheme. 2020We have explained that the admission of other acts evidence to prove identity “‘must satisfy a particularly stringent analysis.’” Brooks, 298 Ga. at 725 (citation and punctuation omitted). | 5 | 7 |
Heard v. Stategreen2 sentences2022Id. [E]vidence offered to prove identity must satisfy a particularly stringent analysis. 2022Id. [E]vidence offered to prove identity must satisfy a particularly stringent analysis. | 1 | 2 |
Pritchett v. Stategreen1 sentence2025See, e.g., Pritchett, 314 Ga. at 776 ; Heard, 309 Ga. at 87-88 (“Because this distinctive-plan purpose involves the same considerations as the State’s argument that the other-acts evidence showed identity, it succeeds or fails with that argument . . . .”). | 1 | 1 |
Moon v. Stategreen2 sentences2022And “[w]hen evidence is offered pursuant to Rule 404 (b) to prove identity, it must satisfy a particularly stringent analysis.” Moon v. State, 312 Ga. 31, 53 (3) (c) (iii) (860 SE2d 519) (2021) (citation and punctuation omitted). 2022And “[w]hen evidence is offered pursuant to Rule 404 (b) to prove identity, it must satisfy a particularly stringent analysis.” Moon v. State, 312 Ga. 31, 53 (3) (c) (iii) (860 SE2d 519) (2021) (citation and punctuation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Harris v. Stategreen1 sentence2022“The physical 6 “Because each of these Georgia evidence rules is modeled on its counterpart in the Federal Rules of Evidence, we may look to federal appellate precedents interpreting the pertinent federal rule for guidance in applying the state provision.” Harris v. State, 314 Ga. 238, 264 (3) (a) ( 875 SE2d 659 ) (2022). 19 similarity must be such that it marks the offenses as the handiwork of the accused. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Plaines
green
1 sentence2019State v. Plaines , 345 Ga. App. 205 , 209-10, 812 S.E.2d 571 (2018) (physical precedent only). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
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.