notification requirement (Georgia) · Go Syfert
← Georgia issues

notification requirement in Georgia

6 Georgia opinions name it 1 courts 1992–2014 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.

Followed or applied (5)

CaseFollowedCited
Hammock v. Stategreen
ga · 2004 · cited in 2 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
2 sentences

2013See generally Hammock v. State, 277 Ga. 612, 615 (3) ( 592 SE2d 415 ) (2004).

2013See generally Hammock v. State, 277 Ga. 612, 615 (3) ( 592 SE2d 415 ) (2004).

22
Moss v. Stategreen
gactapp · 1992 · cited in 2 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1993–1996
2 sentences

1996Moss v. State, 206 Ga. App. 310, 312 (5) ( 425 SE2d 386 ) (1992); compare Armstrong v. State, 264 Ga. 237, 238 (2) ( 442 SE2d 759 ) (1994).

1996Moss v. State, 206 Ga. App. 310, 312 (5) ( 425 SE2d 386 ) (1992); compare Armstrong v. State, 264 Ga. 237, 238 (2) ( 442 SE2d 759 ) (1994).

22
Miller v. Stategreen
gactapp · 1998 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
2 sentences

2014See Miller v. State, 235 Ga. App. 724, 725 ( 510 SE2d 560 ) (1998). 11 The purpose of the notification requirement is to allow the defendant to examine his record to determine if the convictions are in fact his, if he was represented by counsel, and any other defect which would render such documents inadmissible during the pre-sentencing phase of the trial.

2014See Miller v. State, 235 Ga. App. 724, 725 ( 510 SE2d 560 ) (1998). 11 The purpose of the notification requirement is to allow the defendant to examine his record to determine if the convictions are in fact his, if he was represented by counsel, and any other defect which would render such documents inadmissible during the pre-sentencing phase of the trial.

11
Armstrong v. Stategreen
ga · 1994 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996
2 sentences

1996Moss v. State, 206 Ga. App. 310, 312 (5) ( 425 SE2d 386 ) (1992); compare Armstrong v. State, 264 Ga. 237, 238 (2) ( 442 SE2d 759 ) (1994).

1996Moss v. State, 206 Ga. App. 310, 312 (5) ( 425 SE2d 386 ) (1992); compare Armstrong v. State, 264 Ga. 237, 238 (2) ( 442 SE2d 759 ) (1994).

11
Roberts v. Stategreen
ga · 1984 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1992–1992
2 sentences

1992While that written notice did not mention sentencing, it did provide appellant with necessary details regarding the prior convictions which, in combination with oral notification that the State intended to seek a life sentence under the recidivist statute, would fulfill the purpose of the notification requirement by enabling appellant “ ‘to examine his record to determine if the convictions are in fact his, if he was represented by counsel, and any other defect which would render such documents inadmissible during the pre-sentencing phase of the trial.’ [Cit.]” Roberts v. State, 252 Ga. 227, 2

1992While that written notice did not mention sentencing, it did provide appellant with necessary details regarding the prior convictions which, in combination with oral notification that the State intended to seek a life sentence under the recidivist statute, would fulfill the purpose of the notification requirement by enabling appellant “ ‘to examine his record to determine if the convictions are in fact his, if he was represented by counsel, and any other defect which would render such documents inadmissible during the pre-sentencing phase of the trial.’ [Cit.]” Roberts v. State, 252 Ga. 227, 2

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Statutes the citing opinions construe

GA § 17-10-2 (4)

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.

Where else courts name it

OH 38 (1992–2025) CA 27 (1926–2025) IL 19 (1983–2025) NJ 15 (1979–2022) NY 13 (1970–2025) TX 10 (1990–2014) KY 10 (1999–2025) WI 9 (1982–2024) FL 8 (1994–2020) PA 8 (1980–2023) GA 6 (1992–2014) DC 4 (1986–2006) MO 4 (1986–2016) NC 4 (1988–2010) KS 4 (1986–2021) LA 3 (1986–1995) CT 3 (1988–2016) CO 3 (1986–2016) MD 3 (1996–2017) ND 3 (1981–1999) MI 3 (1993–2020) MN 3 (1978–1996) WA 2 (2000–2000) UT 2 (2015–2019) AK 2 (1995–2016) AZ 2 (2011–2012) NE 2 (1989–1991) SC 2 (2011–2012) MS 2 (1997–1998)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check