delinquency hearing in Georgia

2010See also In the Interest of A. D., 282 Ga. App. at 589 (2) (finding that inadmissible hearsay testimony has no probative value in the adjudicatory phase of a delinquency hearing); M.

2010See also In the Interest of A.D., 282 Ga.App. at 589 (2), 639 S.E.2d 556 (finding that inadmissible hearsay testimony has no probative value in the adjudicatory phase of a delinquency hearing); M.K.H. v. State, 135 Ga.App. 565, 569 (2), 218 S.E.2d 284 (1975) ("The adjudication of delinquency was based on hearsay evidence and had no probative value."); Waldrip v. Head, 279 Ga. 826, 828 (II)(A), 620 S.E.2d 829 (2005) (refusing to consider inadmissible hearsay on appeal despite the absence of any objection).

2010See also In the Interest of A.D., 282 Ga.App. at 589 (2), 639 S.E.2d 556 (finding that inadmissible hearsay testimony has no probative value in the adjudicatory phase of a delinquency hearing); M.K.H. v. State, 135 Ga.App. 565, 569 (2), 218 S.E.2d 284 (1975) ("The adjudication of delinquency was based on hearsay evidence and had no probative value."); Waldrip v. Head, 279 Ga. 826, 828 (II)(A), 620 S.E.2d 829 (2005) (refusing to consider inadmissible hearsay on appeal despite the absence of any objection).

2010See also In the Interest of A.D., 282 Ga.App. at 589 (2), 639 S.E.2d 556 (finding that inadmissible hearsay testimony has no probative value in the adjudicatory phase of a delinquency hearing); M.K.H. v. State, 135 Ga.App. 565, 569 (2), 218 S.E.2d 284 (1975) ("The adjudication of delinquency was based on hearsay evidence and had no probative value."); Waldrip v. Head, 279 Ga. 826, 828 (II)(A), 620 S.E.2d 829 (2005) (refusing to consider inadmissible hearsay on appeal despite the absence of any objection).

2010See also In the Interest of A.D., 282 Ga.App. at 589 (2), 639 S.E.2d 556 (finding that inadmissible hearsay testimony has no probative value in the adjudicatory phase of a delinquency hearing); M.K.H. v. State, 135 Ga.App. 565, 569 (2), 218 S.E.2d 284 (1975) ("The adjudication of delinquency was based on hearsay evidence and had no probative value."); Waldrip v. Head, 279 Ga. 826, 828 (II)(A), 620 S.E.2d 829 (2005) (refusing to consider inadmissible hearsay on appeal despite the absence of any objection).

2010See also In the Interest of A.D., 282 Ga.App. at 589 (2), 639 S.E.2d 556 (finding that inadmissible hearsay testimony has no probative value in the adjudicatory phase of a delinquency hearing); M.K.H. v. State, 135 Ga.App. 565, 569 (2), 218 S.E.2d 284 (1975) ("The adjudication of delinquency was based on hearsay evidence and had no probative value."); Waldrip v. Head, 279 Ga. 826, 828 (II)(A), 620 S.E.2d 829 (2005) (refusing to consider inadmissible hearsay on appeal despite the absence of any objection).

2010See C.P. v. State, 167 Ga.App. 374, 375 (2), 306 S.E.2d 688 (1983); J.B. v. State, 139 Ga.App. 545, 547 (3), 228 S.E.2d 712 (1976). [5] (a) In the delinquency petition it was alleged that the 15-year-old child committed a simple assault: On or about the 13th day of September 2008, ... said youth did commit an act, to-wit: by yelling and cursing at [his grandmother], which placed [her] in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury....

2010See C.P. v. State, 167 Ga.App. 374, 375 (2), 306 S.E.2d 688 (1983); J.B. v. State, 139 Ga.App. 545, 547 (3), 228 S.E.2d 712 (1976). [5] (a) In the delinquency petition it was alleged that the 15-year-old child committed a simple assault: On or about the 13th day of September 2008, ... said youth did commit an act, to-wit: by yelling and cursing at [his grandmother], which placed [her] in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury....

2010See also In the Interest of A.D., 282 Ga.App. at 589 (2), 639 S.E.2d 556 (finding that inadmissible hearsay testimony has no probative value in the adjudicatory phase of a delinquency hearing); M.K.H. v. State, 135 Ga.App. 565, 569 (2), 218 S.E.2d 284 (1975) ("The adjudication of delinquency was based on hearsay evidence and had no probative value."); Waldrip v. Head, 279 Ga. 826, 828 (II)(A), 620 S.E.2d 829 (2005) (refusing to consider inadmissible hearsay on appeal despite the absence of any objection).

2010See C.P. v. State, 167 Ga.App. 374, 375 (2), 306 S.E.2d 688 (1983); J.B. v. State, 139 Ga.App. 545, 547 (3), 228 S.E.2d 712 (1976). [5] (a) In the delinquency petition it was alleged that the 15-year-old child committed a simple assault: On or about the 13th day of September 2008, ... said youth did commit an act, to-wit: by yelling and cursing at [his grandmother], which placed [her] in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury....

2007See Holt v. Virginia, 381 U.S. 131, 136-138 , 85 S.Ct. 1375 , 14 L.Ed.2d 290 (1965); In re McLarty, 152 Ga.App. 399, 400-401 (2), 263 S.E.2d 194 (1979).

2007See Holt v. Virginia, 381 U.S. 131, 136-138 , 85 S.Ct. 1375 , 14 L.Ed.2d 290 (1965); In re McLarty, 152 Ga.App. 399, 400-401 (2), 263 S.E.2d 194 (1979).

2007See Holt v. Virginia, 381 U.S. 131, 136-138 , 85 S.Ct. 1375 , 14 L.Ed.2d 290 (1965); In re McLarty, 152 Ga.App. 399, 400-401 (2), 263 S.E.2d 194 (1979).

2007See Holt v. Virginia, 381 U.S. 131, 136-138 , 85 S.Ct. 1375 , 14 L.Ed.2d 290 (1965); In re McLarty, 152 Ga.App. 399, 400-401 (2), 263 S.E.2d 194 (1979).

2005However, the trial court held in favor of C.S. on this issue expressly finding that Strickland had slapped C.S. "[C.S.] accordingly cannot establish how counsel's performance, even if deficient, prejudiced [her] defense so as to support a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel." Gibson v. State, 277 Ga. 486, 488 (2), 591 S.E.2d 800 (2004). [4] While C.S. claims that her trial counsel never sought a continuance in order to have adequate time to prepare a defense, the delinquency hearing transcript reveals that trial counsel sought and obtained a one-week continuance during the course of the

2005However, the trial court held in favor of C.S. on this issue expressly finding that Strickland had slapped C.S. "[C.S.] accordingly cannot establish how counsel's performance, even if deficient, prejudiced [her] defense so as to support a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel." Gibson v. State, 277 Ga. 486, 488 (2), 591 S.E.2d 800 (2004). [4] While C.S. claims that her trial counsel never sought a continuance in order to have adequate time to prepare a defense, the delinquency hearing transcript reveals that trial counsel sought and obtained a one-week continuance during the course of the

1999See id.

1998C.’s motion and afford him a new delinquency hearing, the juvenile court applied the criteria set forth in Timberlake v. State, 246 Ga. 488, 491 (1) ( 271 SE2d 792 ) (1980), wherein the Supreme Court of Georgia held that “[i]t is incumbent on a party who asks for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence to 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 cumula

1998C.’s motion and afford him a new delinquency hearing, the juvenile court applied the criteria set forth in Timberlake v. State, 246 Ga. 488, 491 (1) ( 271 SE2d 792 ) (1980), wherein the Supreme Court of Georgia held that “[i]t is incumbent on a party who asks for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence to 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 cumula