5 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2019 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Goodman v. Stategreen2 sentences2019We find the trial court committed no error. 4 First, regardless of whether Young's request for a Franks hearing was properly denied by the trial court, his argument fails because he was both indicted and convicted, which supersedes his arrest warrant. "[W]here the defendant has been indicted and convicted, an illegal arrest based on a defective warrant is not alone a ground for reversal." Goodman v. State , 251 Ga.App. 350 , 351 (6), 553 S.E.2d 179 (2001). 2019We find the trial court committed no error. 4 First, regardless of whether Young's request for a Franks hearing was properly denied by the trial court, his argument fails because he was both indicted and convicted, which supersedes his arrest warrant. "[W]here the defendant has been indicted and convicted, an illegal arrest based on a defective warrant is not alone a ground for reversal." Goodman v. State , 251 Ga.App. 350 , 351 (6), 553 S.E.2d 179 (2001). | 1 | 2 |
Nichols v. Stategreen2 sentences2019See Nichols v. State, 285 Ga. 784, 785 (2) (a) ( 683 SE2d 610 ) (2009). 13 First, regardless of whether Young’s request for a Franks hearing was properly denied by the trial court, his argument fails because he was both indicted and convicted, which supersedes his arrest warrant. “[W]here the defendant has been indicted and convicted, an illegal arrest based on a defective warrant is not alone a ground for reversal.” Goodman v. State, 251 Ga. App. 350, 351 (6) ( 553 SE2d 179 ) (2001). 2019See Nichols v. State, 285 Ga. 784, 785 (2) (a) ( 683 SE2d 610 ) (2009). 13 First, regardless of whether Young’s request for a Franks hearing was properly denied by the trial court, his argument fails because he was both indicted and convicted, which supersedes his arrest warrant. “[W]here the defendant has been indicted and convicted, an illegal arrest based on a defective warrant is not alone a ground for reversal.” Goodman v. State, 251 Ga. App. 350, 351 (6) ( 553 SE2d 179 ) (2001). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Stonegreen2 sentences2004Franks failed to explain why this was an actual conflict or how it affected his trial. 30 Turpin v. Christenson, 269 Ga. 226, 239 ( 497 SE2d 216 ) (1998). 31 539 U. S. 510 (123 SC 2527, 2537-2538, 156 LE2d 471) (2003). 32 5 39 U. S. at 524, 123 SC at 2536-2537. 33 5 39 U. S. at 524-526, 123 SC at 2536-2538. 34 At the motion for new trial hearing, there was a conflict in the evidence regarding trial counsel’s contact with family members and the information sought from the family. 2004Franks failed to explain why this was an actual conflict or how it affected his trial. 30 Turpin v. Christenson, 269 Ga. 226, 239 ( 497 SE2d 216 ) (1998). 31 539 U. S. 510 (123 SC 2527, 2537-2538, 156 LE2d 471) (2003). 32 5 39 U. S. at 524, 123 SC at 2536-2537. 33 5 39 U. S. at 524-526, 123 SC at 2536-2538. 34 At the motion for new trial hearing, there was a conflict in the evidence regarding trial counsel’s contact with family members and the information sought from the family. | 1 | 1 |
Turpin v. Christensongreen2 sentences2004Franks failed to explain why this was an actual conflict or how it affected his trial. 30 Turpin v. Christenson, 269 Ga. 226, 239 ( 497 SE2d 216 ) (1998). 31 539 U. S. 510 (123 SC 2527, 2537-2538, 156 LE2d 471) (2003). 32 5 39 U. S. at 524, 123 SC at 2536-2537. 33 5 39 U. S. at 524-526, 123 SC at 2536-2538. 34 At the motion for new trial hearing, there was a conflict in the evidence regarding trial counsel’s contact with family members and the information sought from the family. 2004Franks failed to explain why this was an actual conflict or how it affected his trial. 30 Turpin v. Christenson, 269 Ga. 226, 239 ( 497 SE2d 216 ) (1998). 31 539 U. S. 510 (123 SC 2527, 2537-2538, 156 LE2d 471) (2003). 32 5 39 U. S. at 524, 123 SC at 2536-2537. 33 5 39 U. S. at 524-526, 123 SC at 2536-2538. 34 At the motion for new trial hearing, there was a conflict in the evidence regarding trial counsel’s contact with family members and the information sought from the family. | 1 | 1 |
Pennsylvania v. Munizgreen2 sentences1997The trial court summarily denied Franks' motion, finding that the testimony of Snow and Magill "demonstrated" that the question regarding the bandage was a "routine booking question" under Pennsylvania v. Muniz, 496 U.S. 582, 601 , 110 S.Ct. 2638, 2650 , 110 L.Ed.2d 528 (1990). *597 The Fifth Amendment requires the exclusion of any statement made by an accused during custodial interrogation, unless he has been advised of his rights and has voluntarily waived those rights. 1997The trial court summarily denied Franks' motion, finding that the testimony of Snow and Magill "demonstrated" that the question regarding the bandage was a "routine booking question" under Pennsylvania v. Muniz, 496 U.S. 582, 601 , 110 S.Ct. 2638, 2650 , 110 L.Ed.2d 528 (1990). *597 The Fifth Amendment requires the exclusion of any statement made by an accused during custodial interrogation, unless he has been advised of his rights and has voluntarily waived those rights. | 1 | 1 |
Williams v. Stategreen2 sentences1995Williams v. State, 251 Ga. 749, 796 ( 312 SE2d 40 ) (1983). 1995Williams v. State, 251 Ga. 749, 796 ( 312 SE2d 40 ) (1983). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
John Kelly, Jr. v. Steven Curtis Julie M. Gibson J.R. Moore Chatham County, Gagreen2 sentences2019But see Kelly v. Curtis , 21 F.3d 1544 , 1554 (II) (A) (2) (b) (11th Cir. 1994) (allowing a Franks hearing to challenge an arrest warrant). 2019But see Kelly v. Curtis , 21 F.3d 1544 , 1554 (II) (A) (2) (b) (11th Cir. 1994) (allowing a Franks hearing to challenge an arrest warrant). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Wiggins v. Smith, Warden
green
1 sentence2004Franks failed to explain why this was an actual conflict or how it affected his trial. 30 Turpin v. Christenson, 269 Ga. 226, 239 ( 497 SE2d 216 ) (1998). 31 539 U. S. 510 (123 SC 2527, 2537-2538, 156 LE2d 471) (2003). 32 5 39 U. S. at 524, 123 SC at 2536-2537. 33 5 39 U. S. at 524-526, 123 SC at 2536-2538. 34 At the motion for new trial hearing, there was a conflict in the evidence regarding trial counsel’s contact with family members and the information sought from the family. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Franks v. State
green
2 sentences2004Appeals from two pretrial rulings by the trial court resulted in written decisions by this Court: Franks v. State, 268 Ga. 238 ( 486 SE2d 594 ) (1997) (granted interim review in which this Court suppressed Franks’s post-arrest statement) and Franks v. State, 266 Ga. 707 ( 469 SE2d 651 ) (1996) (affirming the denial of Franks’s motion for discharge and acquittal based on his speedy trial demand). 2004Appeals from two pretrial rulings by the trial court resulted in written decisions by this Court: Franks v. State, 268 Ga. 238 ( 486 SE2d 594 ) (1997) (granted interim review in which this Court suppressed Franks’s post-arrest statement) and Franks v. State, 266 Ga. 707 ( 469 SE2d 651 ) (1996) (affirming the denial of Franks’s motion for discharge and acquittal based on his speedy trial demand). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Franks v. State
green
2 sentences2004Appeals from two pretrial rulings by the trial court resulted in written decisions by this Court: Franks v. State, 268 Ga. 238 ( 486 SE2d 594 ) (1997) (granted interim review in which this Court suppressed Franks’s post-arrest statement) and Franks v. State, 266 Ga. 707 ( 469 SE2d 651 ) (1996) (affirming the denial of Franks’s motion for discharge and acquittal based on his speedy trial demand). 2004Appeals from two pretrial rulings by the trial court resulted in written decisions by this Court: Franks v. State, 268 Ga. 238 ( 486 SE2d 594 ) (1997) (granted interim review in which this Court suppressed Franks’s post-arrest statement) and Franks v. State, 266 Ga. 707 ( 469 SE2d 651 ) (1996) (affirming the denial of Franks’s motion for discharge and acquittal based on his speedy trial demand). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Miranda v. Arizona
green
2 sentences1997NOTES [1] Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). [2] The Court in Muniz specifically referred to questions asked to secure "biographical data necessary to complete booking or pretrial services." Muniz, supra at 601 , 110 S.Ct. at 2650 . [3] The parties agree that Franks was not in need of medical assistance and none was offered. [4] Magill thought Franks might have been injured when he was pulled from under the bed prior to his arrest because the bandage was clean and was on the forearm near the elbow, not the upper arm as stated in the reports. 1997NOTES [1] Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). [2] The Court in Muniz specifically referred to questions asked to secure "biographical data necessary to complete booking or pretrial services." Muniz, supra at 601 , 110 S.Ct. at 2650 . [3] The parties agree that Franks was not in need of medical assistance and none was offered. [4] Magill thought Franks might have been injured when he was pulled from under the bed prior to his arrest because the bandage was clean and was on the forearm near the elbow, not the upper arm as stated in the reports. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
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.