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 1988–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
Mathis v. Stategreen2 sentences2005See Poole, supra (policeman's conduct in pawning confiscated handgun to get money to pay personal water bill was "far outside the realm of acceptable police behavior"); Whitley v. State, 176 Ga.App. 364 , 336 S.E.2d 301 (1985) (even though police officers were following an accepted police practice, it was proper to prosecute police officers for theft of city property when they served confiscated alcoholic beverages at a police function); Mathis v. State, 147 Ga.App. 148, 149 (3), 248 S.E.2d 212 (1978) (not error to fail to charge "claim of right" where defendant merely denied any intent to dep 2005See Poole, supra (policeman's conduct in pawning confiscated handgun to get money to pay personal water bill was "far outside the realm of acceptable police behavior"); Whitley v. State, 176 Ga.App. 364 , 336 S.E.2d 301 (1985) (even though police officers were following an accepted police practice, it was proper to prosecute police officers for theft of city property when they served confiscated alcoholic beverages at a police function); Mathis v. State, 147 Ga.App. 148, 149 (3), 248 S.E.2d 212 (1978) (not error to fail to charge "claim of right" where defendant merely denied any intent to dep | 2 | 2 |
Baker v. Stategreen2 sentences2024It requires proof of criminal intent — the knowing appropriation of funds or property belonging to another.”5 “The statute cannot properly be employed in the enforcement of civil contract rights[;]” otherwise, we risk violating “the constitutional prohibition against imprisonment for debt[.]”6 While Combs argues that he was in a partnership with the Robinsons and therefore could not be guilty of conversion for any decisions he made with partnership funds,7 we disagree that it was shown as a matter of law that a partnership existed, and it does not appear that Combs argued at trial that additio 2024It requires proof of criminal intent — the knowing appropriation of funds or property belonging to another.”5 “The statute cannot properly be employed in the enforcement of civil contract rights[;]” otherwise, we risk violating “the constitutional prohibition against imprisonment for debt[.]”6 While Combs argues that he was in a partnership with the Robinsons and therefore could not be guilty of conversion for any decisions he made with partnership funds,7 we disagree that it was shown as a matter of law that a partnership existed, and it does not appear that Combs argued at trial that additio | 1 | 1 |
Fox v. Stategreen2 sentences2024It requires proof of criminal intent — the knowing appropriation of funds or property belonging to another.”5 “The statute cannot properly be employed in the enforcement of civil contract rights[;]” otherwise, we risk violating “the constitutional prohibition against imprisonment for debt[.]”6 While Combs argues that he was in a partnership with the Robinsons and therefore could not be guilty of conversion for any decisions he made with partnership funds,7 we disagree that it was shown as a matter of law that a partnership existed, and it does not appear that Combs argued at trial that additio 2024It requires proof of criminal intent — the knowing appropriation of funds or property belonging to another.”5 “The statute cannot properly be employed in the enforcement of civil contract rights[;]” otherwise, we risk violating “the constitutional prohibition against imprisonment for debt[.]”6 While Combs argues that he was in a partnership with the Robinsons and therefore could not be guilty of conversion for any decisions he made with partnership funds,7 we disagree that it was shown as a matter of law that a partnership existed, and it does not appear that Combs argued at trial that additio | 1 | 1 |
State v. Cohengreen2 sentences2021See State v. Cohen, 302 Ga. 616 , 624 n.9 ( 807 SE2d 861 ) (2017). 2021See State v. Cohen, 302 Ga. 616 , 624 n.9 ( 807 SE2d 861 ) (2017). | 1 | 1 |
Wideman v. Stategreen2 sentences2021See Dorsey v. State, 279 Ga. 534, 543 (4) (b) ( 615 SE2d 512 ) (2005) (defendant former sheriff was accused of theft based on routine use of county property for his own convenience and profit; Supreme Court held that accused could not have had an honest claim of right to the county’s property and trial court was not required to instruct jury on affirmative defense); Wideman v. State, 222 Ga. App. 733, 733-734 (2) ( 476 SE2d 49 ) (1996) (no “honest claim of right” jury instruction required for accused who stole one brand of television, when he claimed that victim owed him a different brand of t 2021See Dorsey v. State, 279 Ga. 534, 543 (4) (b) ( 615 SE2d 512 ) (2005) (defendant former sheriff was accused of theft based on routine use of county property for his own convenience and profit; Supreme Court held that accused could not have had an honest claim of right to the county’s property and trial court was not required to instruct jury on affirmative defense); Wideman v. State, 222 Ga. App. 733, 733-734 (2) ( 476 SE2d 49 ) (1996) (no “honest claim of right” jury instruction required for accused who stole one brand of television, when he claimed that victim owed him a different brand of t | 1 | 1 |
Dorsey v. Stategreen2 sentences2021See Dorsey v. State, 279 Ga. 534, 543 (4) (b) ( 615 SE2d 512 ) (2005) (defendant former sheriff was accused of theft based on routine use of county property for his own convenience and profit; Supreme Court held that accused could not have had an honest claim of right to the county’s property and trial court was not required to instruct jury on affirmative defense); Wideman v. State, 222 Ga. App. 733, 733-734 (2) ( 476 SE2d 49 ) (1996) (no “honest claim of right” jury instruction required for accused who stole one brand of television, when he claimed that victim owed him a different brand of t 2021See Dorsey v. State, 279 Ga. 534, 543 (4) (b) ( 615 SE2d 512 ) (2005) (defendant former sheriff was accused of theft based on routine use of county property for his own convenience and profit; Supreme Court held that accused could not have had an honest claim of right to the county’s property and trial court was not required to instruct jury on affirmative defense); Wideman v. State, 222 Ga. App. 733, 733-734 (2) ( 476 SE2d 49 ) (1996) (no “honest claim of right” jury instruction required for accused who stole one brand of television, when he claimed that victim owed him a different brand of t | 1 | 1 |
Foskey v. Stategreen2 sentences2021See Foskey v. State, 125 Ga. App. 672, 674 (3) ( 188 SE2d 825 ) (1972) (where accused incorrectly but subjectively believed that he was allowed to purchase goods off wholesale grocery truck for a reduced price, trial court was required to instruct jury on honest claim defense). 2021See Foskey v. State, 125 Ga. App. 672, 674 (3) ( 188 SE2d 825 ) (1972) (where accused incorrectly but subjectively believed that he was allowed to purchase goods off wholesale grocery truck for a reduced price, trial court was required to instruct jury on honest claim defense). | 1 | 1 |
Bullard v. Stategreen2 sentences2005See Poole, supra (policeman's conduct in pawning confiscated handgun to get money to pay personal water bill was "far outside the realm of acceptable police behavior"); Whitley v. State, 176 Ga.App. 364 , 336 S.E.2d 301 (1985) (even though police officers were following an accepted police practice, it was proper to prosecute police officers for theft of city property when they served confiscated alcoholic beverages at a police function); Mathis v. State, 147 Ga.App. 148, 149 (3), 248 S.E.2d 212 (1978) (not error to fail to charge "claim of right" where defendant merely denied any intent to dep 2005See Poole, supra (policeman's conduct in pawning confiscated handgun to get money to pay personal water bill was "far outside the realm of acceptable police behavior"); Whitley v. State, 176 Ga.App. 364 , 336 S.E.2d 301 (1985) (even though police officers were following an accepted police practice, it was proper to prosecute police officers for theft of city property when they served confiscated alcoholic beverages at a police function); Mathis v. State, 147 Ga.App. 148, 149 (3), 248 S.E.2d 212 (1978) (not error to fail to charge "claim of right" where defendant merely denied any intent to dep | 1 | 1 |
State v. Bentongreen2 sentences2005See State v. Benton, 278 Ga. 503 , 604 S.E.2d 169 (2004); Joyce v. State, 235 Ga.App. 167 , 509 S.E.2d 85 (1998). (b) Dorsey asserts the trial court should have charged the jury that an affirmative defense to a prosecution for theft arises if defendant "[a]cted under an honest claim of right to the property or service involved or under a right to acquire or dispose of it as he did." OCGA § 16-8-10(2). 2005See State v. Benton, 278 Ga. 503 , 604 S.E.2d 169 (2004); Joyce v. State, 235 Ga.App. 167 , 509 S.E.2d 85 (1998). (b) Dorsey asserts the trial court should have charged the jury that an affirmative defense to a prosecution for theft arises if defendant "[a]cted under an honest claim of right to the property or service involved or under a right to acquire or dispose of it as he did." OCGA § 16-8-10(2). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Scarber v. State
green
2 sentences2024It requires proof of criminal intent — the knowing appropriation of funds or property belonging to another.”5 “The statute cannot properly be employed in the enforcement of civil contract rights[;]” otherwise, we risk violating “the constitutional prohibition against imprisonment for debt[.]”6 While Combs argues that he was in a partnership with the Robinsons and therefore could not be guilty of conversion for any decisions he made with partnership funds,7 we disagree that it was shown as a matter of law that a partnership existed, and it does not appear that Combs argued at trial that additio 2024It requires proof of criminal intent — the knowing appropriation of funds or property belonging to another.”5 “The statute cannot properly be employed in the enforcement of civil contract rights[;]” otherwise, we risk violating “the constitutional prohibition against imprisonment for debt[.]”6 While Combs argues that he was in a partnership with the Robinsons and therefore could not be guilty of conversion for any decisions he made with partnership funds,7 we disagree that it was shown as a matter of law that a partnership existed, and it does not appear that Combs argued at trial that additio | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Connally v. State
green
2 sentences2024It requires proof of criminal intent — the knowing appropriation of funds or property belonging to another.”5 “The statute cannot properly be employed in the enforcement of civil contract rights[;]” otherwise, we risk violating “the constitutional prohibition against imprisonment for debt[.]”6 While Combs argues that he was in a partnership with the Robinsons and therefore could not be guilty of conversion for any decisions he made with partnership funds,7 we disagree that it was shown as a matter of law that a partnership existed, and it does not appear that Combs argued at trial that additio 2024It requires proof of criminal intent — the knowing appropriation of funds or property belonging to another.”5 “The statute cannot properly be employed in the enforcement of civil contract rights[;]” otherwise, we risk violating “the constitutional prohibition against imprisonment for debt[.]”6 While Combs argues that he was in a partnership with the Robinsons and therefore could not be guilty of conversion for any decisions he made with partnership funds,7 we disagree that it was shown as a matter of law that a partnership existed, and it does not appear that Combs argued at trial that additio | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Smith v. State
green
2 sentences2024It requires proof of criminal intent — the knowing appropriation of funds or property belonging to another.”5 “The statute cannot properly be employed in the enforcement of civil contract rights[;]” otherwise, we risk violating “the constitutional prohibition against imprisonment for debt[.]”6 While Combs argues that he was in a partnership with the Robinsons and therefore could not be guilty of conversion for any decisions he made with partnership funds,7 we disagree that it was shown as a matter of law that a partnership existed, and it does not appear that Combs argued at trial that additio 2024It requires proof of criminal intent — the knowing appropriation of funds or property belonging to another.”5 “The statute cannot properly be employed in the enforcement of civil contract rights[;]” otherwise, we risk violating “the constitutional prohibition against imprisonment for debt[.]”6 While Combs argues that he was in a partnership with the Robinsons and therefore could not be guilty of conversion for any decisions he made with partnership funds,7 we disagree that it was shown as a matter of law that a partnership existed, and it does not appear that Combs argued at trial that additio | 1 | 2024–2024 |
State v. Burns
neutral
2 sentences2021A sheriff routinely using county resources for his own profit and benefit, and a thief 4 In its order granting summary judgment, the trial court relied on what it found to be persuasive authority from Washington State, State v. Burns, 161 Wash. 362 ( 297 P 212 ) (1931), which held that one who demands the return of more than the specific amount stolen from him is guilty of extortion. 2021A sheriff routinely using county resources for his own profit and benefit, and a thief 4 In its order granting summary judgment, the trial court relied on what it found to be persuasive authority from Washington State, State v. Burns, 161 Wash. 362 ( 297 P 212 ) (1931), which held that one who demands the return of more than the specific amount stolen from him is guilty of extortion. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Cincinnati Insurance Company v. Tire Master of Thomaston, Inc.
green
2 sentences2018Co. v. Tire Master of Thomaston , 183 Ga. App. 64 , 65, 357 S.E.2d 812 (1987) ; Cottrell v. Smith , 299 Ga. 517 , 524 (II) (A), 788 S.E.2d 772 (2016) ("imputing to another a crime punishable by law," constitutes defamation per se) (punctuation omitted). 2018Co. v. Tire Master of Thomaston , 183 Ga. App. 64 , 65, 357 S.E.2d 812 (1987) ; Cottrell v. Smith , 299 Ga. 517 , 524 (II) (A), 788 S.E.2d 772 (2016) ("imputing to another a crime punishable by law," constitutes defamation per se) (punctuation omitted). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Cottrell v. Smith
green
2 sentences2018Co. v. Tire Master of Thomaston , 183 Ga. App. 64 , 65, 357 S.E.2d 812 (1987) ; Cottrell v. Smith , 299 Ga. 517 , 524 (II) (A), 788 S.E.2d 772 (2016) ("imputing to another a crime punishable by law," constitutes defamation per se) (punctuation omitted). 2018Co. v. Tire Master of Thomaston , 183 Ga. App. 64 , 65, 357 S.E.2d 812 (1987) ; Cottrell v. Smith , 299 Ga. 517 , 524 (II) (A), 788 S.E.2d 772 (2016) ("imputing to another a crime punishable by law," constitutes defamation per se) (punctuation omitted). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Joyce v. State
neutral
2 sentences2005See State v. Benton, 278 Ga. 503 , 604 S.E.2d 169 (2004); Joyce v. State, 235 Ga.App. 167 , 509 S.E.2d 85 (1998). (b) Dorsey asserts the trial court should have charged the jury that an affirmative defense to a prosecution for theft arises if defendant "[a]cted under an honest claim of right to the property or service involved or under a right to acquire or dispose of it as he did." OCGA § 16-8-10(2). 2005See State v. Benton, 278 Ga. 503 , 604 S.E.2d 169 (2004); Joyce v. State, 235 Ga.App. 167 , 509 S.E.2d 85 (1998). (b) Dorsey asserts the trial court should have charged the jury that an affirmative defense to a prosecution for theft arises if defendant "[a]cted under an honest claim of right to the property or service involved or under a right to acquire or dispose of it as he did." OCGA § 16-8-10(2). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Whitley v. State
green
2 sentences2005See Poole, supra (policeman's conduct in pawning confiscated handgun to get money to pay personal water bill was "far outside the realm of acceptable police behavior"); Whitley v. State, 176 Ga.App. 364 , 336 S.E.2d 301 (1985) (even though police officers were following an accepted police practice, it was proper to prosecute police officers for theft of city property when they served confiscated alcoholic beverages at a police function); Mathis v. State, 147 Ga.App. 148, 149 (3), 248 S.E.2d 212 (1978) (not error to fail to charge "claim of right" where defendant merely denied any intent to dep 2005See Poole, supra (policeman's conduct in pawning confiscated handgun to get money to pay personal water bill was "far outside the realm of acceptable police behavior"); Whitley v. State, 176 Ga.App. 364 , 336 S.E.2d 301 (1985) (even though police officers were following an accepted police practice, it was proper to prosecute police officers for theft of city property when they served confiscated alcoholic beverages at a police function); Mathis v. State, 147 Ga.App. 148, 149 (3), 248 S.E.2d 212 (1978) (not error to fail to charge "claim of right" where defendant merely denied any intent to dep | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Calloway v. State
green
2 sentences1988However, the colloquy between counsel and the court makes evident that it involves subsection (2) of OCGA § 16-8-10, which states: “It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution for violation of Code Sections 16-8-2 through 16-8-7 that the person ... (2) Acted under an honest claim of ... a right to acquire . . . [the property] as he did. ...” Appellant cites Calloway v. State, 176 Ga. App. 674 ( 337 SE2d 397 ) (1985) as authority for his claim that because this was his only real defense, the court’s failure to charge on it is reversible error. 1988However, the colloquy between counsel and the court makes evident that it involves subsection (2) of OCGA § 16-8-10, which states: “It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution for violation of Code Sections 16-8-2 through 16-8-7 that the person ... (2) Acted under an honest claim of ... a right to acquire . . . [the property] as he did. ...” Appellant cites Calloway v. State, 176 Ga. App. 674 ( 337 SE2d 397 ) (1985) as authority for his claim that because this was his only real defense, the court’s failure to charge on it is reversible error. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
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.
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.