7 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1974–2022 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 |
|---|---|---|
Bellamy v. Stategreen2 sentences2022We have held that “[i]t is improper for the court to give any instruction to the jury concerning possible sentences in a felony case before the jury has determined the question of guilt or innocence.” Bellamy v. State, 272 Ga. 157, 159 (4) (527 SE2d 867) (2000) (quoting Ford v. State, 232 Ga. 511, 519 (14) (207 SE2d 494) (1974)). 2022We have held that “[i]t is improper for the court to give any instruction to the jury concerning possible sentences in a felony case before the jury has determined the question of guilt or innocence.” Bellamy v. State, 272 Ga. 157, 159 (4) (527 SE2d 867) (2000) (quoting Ford v. State, 232 Ga. 511, 519 (14) (207 SE2d 494) (1974)). | 4 | 4 |
Ford v. Stategreen2 sentences2022We have held that “[i]t is improper for the court to give any instruction to the jury concerning possible sentences in a felony case before the jury has determined the question of guilt or innocence.” Bellamy v. State, 272 Ga. 157, 159 (4) (527 SE2d 867) (2000) (quoting Ford v. State, 232 Ga. 511, 519 (14) (207 SE2d 494) (1974)). 2022We have held that “[i]t is improper for the court to give any instruction to the jury concerning possible sentences in a felony case before the jury has determined the question of guilt or innocence.” Bellamy v. State, 272 Ga. 157, 159 (4) (527 SE2d 867) (2000) (quoting Ford v. State, 232 Ga. 511, 519 (14) (207 SE2d 494) (1974)). | 2 | 4 |
State v. Patillogreen2 sentences2015As the State argues in response, however, other than OCGA § 17-7-131 (b) (3)’s “limited exception to the general rule proscribing consideration of the consequences of a guilty verdict,” State v. Patillo, 262 Ga. 259, 260 ( 417 SE2d 139 ) (1992), our Supreme Court has held that “[i]t is improper for the court to give any instruction to the jury concerning possible sentences in a felony case before the jury has determined the question of guilt or innocence.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Bellamy v. State, 272 Ga. 157, 159 (4) ( 527 SE2d 867 ) (2000). 2015As the State argues in response, however, other than OCGA § 17-7-131 (b) (3)’s “limited exception to the general rule proscribing consideration of the consequences of a guilty verdict,” State v. Patillo, 262 Ga. 259, 260 ( 417 SE2d 139 ) (1992), our Supreme Court has held that “[i]t is improper for the court to give any instruction to the jury concerning possible sentences in a felony case before the jury has determined the question of guilt or innocence.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Bellamy v. State, 272 Ga. 157, 159 (4) ( 527 SE2d 867 ) (2000). | 1 | 1 |
Stinski v. Stategreen2 sentences2015See also Stinski v. State, 286 Ga. 839, 848 (36) ( 691 SE2d 854 ) (2010) (“The trial court did not err by refusing to charge the jury at the beginning of the guilt/innocence phase regarding the procedures to be followed in the sentencing phase.”). 2015See also Stinski v. State, 286 Ga. 839, 848 (36) ( 691 SE2d 854 ) (2010) (“The trial court did not err by refusing to charge the jury at the beginning of the guilt/innocence phase regarding the procedures to be followed in the sentencing phase.”). | 1 | 1 |
Simmons v. South Carolinagreen1 sentence2002See Simmons, 512 U. S. at 163 . “ Tt is improper for the court to give any instruction to the jury concerning possible sentences in a felony case before the jury has determined the question of guilt or innocence. | 1 | 1 |
Harris v. Stategreen2 sentences1989See generally Harris v. State, 234 Ga. 871, 873 ( 218 SE2d 583 ) (1975). 1989See generally Harris v. State, 234 Ga. 871, 873 ( 218 SE2d 583 ) (1975). | 1 | 1 |
Moore v. Stategreen2 sentences1974Moore v. State, 228 Ga. 662, 665 ( 187 SE2d 277 ); Hasp v. State, 228 Ga. 806 (1) ( 188 SE2d 511 ). 1974Moore v. State, 228 Ga. 662, 665 ( 187 SE2d 277 ); Hasp v. State, 228 Ga. 806 (1) ( 188 SE2d 511 ). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hasp v. State
neutral
2 sentences1974Moore v. State, 228 Ga. 662, 665 ( 187 SE2d 277 ); Hasp v. State, 228 Ga. 806 (1) ( 188 SE2d 511 ). 1974Moore v. State, 228 Ga. 662, 665 ( 187 SE2d 277 ); Hasp v. State, 228 Ga. 806 (1) ( 188 SE2d 511 ). | 1 | 1974–1974 |
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.