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.
5 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 2010–2022 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Zackery v. Stategreen2 sentences2022Because an opening statement is not evidence, our Supreme Court has observed that “the appropriateness of a Bruton challenge in the situation of comments made in the course of [an attorney’s] opening statement is subject to question.” Zackery v. State, 286 Ga. 399, 402 (3) ( 688 SE2d 354 ) (2010). 2021Thus, the appropriateness of a Bruton challenge in the situation of comments made in the course of the State’s opening statement is subject to question.”). 46 violation such that the failure of the other co-defendant’s trial counsel to object was deficient); Zackery v. State, 286 Ga. 399, 402 ( 688 SE2d 354 ) (2010) (assuming that a Bruton challenge can be made to the State’s opening statement, there was no Bruton violation where the prosecutor’s comment in opening statement that one co-defendant felt that another co-defendant was involved in the crime fell short of clearly inculpating that ot | 3 | 4 |
Simpkins v. Stategreen1 sentence2021See Simpkins v. State, 303 Ga. 752, 756-757 (814 SE2d 289) (2018) (assuming that a Bruton challenge can be made to the State’s opening statement, the prosecutor’s explicit comment in opening statement about what one co-defendant had done, but not what the other co-defendant had done, did not amount to a clear Bruton violation such that the failure of the other co-defendant’s trial counsel to object was deficient); Zackery v. State, 286 Ga. 399, 402 (688 SE2d 354) (2010) (assuming that a Bruton challenge can be made to the State’s opening statement, there was no Bruton violation where the prose | 1 | 1 |
Ardis v. Stategreen2 sentences2021Thus, the appropriateness of a Bruton challenge in the situation of comments made in the course of the State’s opening statement is subject to question.”). 46 violation such that the failure of the other co-defendant’s trial counsel to object was deficient); Zackery v. State, 286 Ga. 399, 402 ( 688 SE2d 354 ) (2010) (assuming that a Bruton challenge can be made to the State’s opening statement, there was no Bruton violation where the prosecutor’s comment in opening statement that one co-defendant felt that another co-defendant was involved in the crime fell short of clearly inculpating that ot 2021Thus, the appropriateness of a Bruton challenge in the situation of comments made in the course of the State’s opening statement is subject to question.”). 46 violation such that the failure of the other co-defendant’s trial counsel to object was deficient); Zackery v. State, 286 Ga. 399, 402 ( 688 SE2d 354 ) (2010) (assuming that a Bruton challenge can be made to the State’s opening statement, there was no Bruton violation where the prosecutor’s comment in opening statement that one co-defendant felt that another co-defendant was involved in the crime fell short of clearly inculpating that ot | 1 | 1 |
Simpkins v. Stategreen1 sentence2021See Simpkins v. State, 303 Ga. 752, 756-757 (814 SE2d 289) (2018) (assuming that a Bruton challenge can be made to the State’s opening statement, the prosecutor’s explicit comment in opening statement about what one co-defendant had done, but not what the other co-defendant had done, did not amount to a clear Bruton violation such that the failure of the other co-defendant’s trial counsel to object was deficient); Zackery v. State, 286 Ga. 399, 402 (688 SE2d 354) (2010) (assuming that a Bruton challenge can be made to the State’s opening statement, there was no Bruton violation where the prose | 1 | 1 |
Watkins v. Stategreen2 sentences2021Thus, the appropriateness of a Bruton challenge in the situation of comments made in the course of the State’s opening statement is subject to question.”). 46 violation such that the failure of the other co-defendant’s trial counsel to object was deficient); Zackery v. State, 286 Ga. 399, 402 ( 688 SE2d 354 ) (2010) (assuming that a Bruton challenge can be made to the State’s opening statement, there was no Bruton violation where the prosecutor’s comment in opening statement that one co-defendant felt that another co-defendant was involved in the crime fell short of clearly inculpating that ot 2021Thus, the appropriateness of a Bruton challenge in the situation of comments made in the course of the State’s opening statement is subject to question.”). 46 violation such that the failure of the other co-defendant’s trial counsel to object was deficient); Zackery v. State, 286 Ga. 399, 402 ( 688 SE2d 354 ) (2010) (assuming that a Bruton challenge can be made to the State’s opening statement, there was no Bruton violation where the prosecutor’s comment in opening statement that one co-defendant felt that another co-defendant was involved in the crime fell short of clearly inculpating that ot | 1 | 1 |
Polite v. Stategreen2 sentences2010See Polite v. State, 273 Ga. App. 235, 238 (3) ( 614 SE2d 849 ) (2005). 2010See Polite v. State, 273 Ga. App. 235, 238 (3) ( 614 SE2d 849 ) (2005). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ball v. State
green
2 sentences2022Because an opening statement is not evidence, our Supreme Court has observed that “the appropriateness of a Bruton challenge in the situation of comments made in the course of [an attorney’s] opening statement is subject to question.” Zackery v. State, 286 Ga. 399, 402 (3) ( 688 SE2d 354 ) (2010). 2021Thus, the appropriateness of a Bruton challenge in the situation of comments made in the course of the State’s opening statement is subject to question.”). 46 violation such that the failure of the other co-defendant’s trial counsel to object was deficient); Zackery v. State, 286 Ga. 399, 402 ( 688 SE2d 354 ) (2010) (assuming that a Bruton challenge can be made to the State’s opening statement, there was no Bruton violation where the prosecutor’s comment in opening statement that one co-defendant felt that another co-defendant was involved in the crime fell short of clearly inculpating that ot | 4 | 2018–2022 |