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 1964–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Miller v. Stategreen1 sentence2020See Miller v. State, 305 Ga. 276, 281 ( 824 SE2d 342 ) (2019) (a special demurrer claim “must be brought before trial, or it is waived”). | 1 | 1 |
Miller v. Stategreen1 sentence2020See Miller v. State, 305 Ga. 276, 281 ( 824 SE2d 342 ) (2019) (a special demurrer claim “must be brought before trial, or it is waived”). | 1 | 1 |
Washington v. Stategreen1 sentence2015Fowler argues that counsel was ineffective for failing to file a special demurrer to challenge the lack of specificity as to the dates of the crimes. “[B]ecause a defendant can be re-indicted after the grant of a special demurrer, a failure to file such 11 a demurrer generally will not support a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel.” Washington v. State, 298 Ga. App. 105, 106 ( 679 SE2d 111 ) (2009). (b) Forensic interview. | 1 | 1 |
Lewis v. Stategreen2 sentences2012We disagree. 3 Since “a defendant can be re-indicted after the grant of a special demurrer, a failure to file such a demurrer generally will not support a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel.” (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Lewis v. State, 304 Ga. App. 831, 837 (5) ( 698 SE2d 365 ) (2010). 2012We disagree. 3 Since “a defendant can be re-indicted after the grant of a special demurrer, a failure to file such a demurrer generally will not support a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel.” (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Lewis v. State, 304 Ga. App. 831, 837 (5) ( 698 SE2d 365 ) (2010). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Washington v. State
green
1 sentence2015Fowler argues that counsel was ineffective for failing to file a special demurrer to challenge the lack of specificity as to the dates of the crimes. “[B]ecause a defendant can be re-indicted after the grant of a special demurrer, a failure to file such 11 a demurrer generally will not support a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel.” Washington v. State, 298 Ga. App. 105, 106 ( 679 SE2d 111 ) (2009). (b) Forensic interview. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Simmons v. Watson
green
2 sentences1967Simmons v. Watson, 221 Ga. 765 (1) ( 147 SE2d 322 ); Dupree v. Babcock, 100 Ga. App. 767 (1) ( 112 SE2d 415 ). 1967Simmons v. Watson, 221 Ga. 765 (1) ( 147 SE2d 322 ); Dupree v. Babcock, 100 Ga. App. 767 (1) ( 112 SE2d 415 ). | 1 | 1967–1967 |
DuPree v. Babcock
green
2 sentences1967Simmons v. Watson, 221 Ga. 765 (1) ( 147 SE2d 322 ); Dupree v. Babcock, 100 Ga. App. 767 (1) ( 112 SE2d 415 ). 1967Simmons v. Watson, 221 Ga. 765 (1) ( 147 SE2d 322 ); Dupree v. Babcock, 100 Ga. App. 767 (1) ( 112 SE2d 415 ). | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Martin v. Bartow Iron Works
green
2 sentences1964The petition meets the requirements of the statute, Code § 81-101, as stated in Dumas v. Dumas, 206 Ga. 767 (3) ( 58 SE2d 830 ): “The plaintiff, having plainly and concisely stated the material ultimate facts upon which she intends to recover, is not required to make an exhaustive statement of the exact evidence upon which she relies.” Martin v. Bartow Iron Works, 35 Ga. 320, 322 . 1964The petition meets the requirements of the statute, Code § 81-101, as stated in Dumas v. Dumas, 206 Ga. 767 (3) ( 58 SE2d 830 ): "The plaintiff, having plainly and concisely stated the material ultimate facts upon which she intends to recover, is not required to make an exhaustive statement of the exact evidence upon which she relies." Martin v. Bartow Iron Works, 35 Ga. 320, 322 . | 1 | 1964–1964 |
Dumas v. Dumas
neutral
2 sentences1964The petition meets the requirements of the statute, Code § 81-101, as stated in Dumas v. Dumas, 206 Ga. 767 (3) ( 58 SE2d 830 ): "The plaintiff, having plainly and concisely stated the material ultimate facts upon which she intends to recover, is not required to make an exhaustive statement of the exact evidence upon which she relies." Martin v. Bartow Iron Works, 35 Ga. 320, 322 . 1964The petition meets the requirements of the statute, Code § 81-101, as stated in Dumas v. Dumas, 206 Ga. 767 (3) ( 58 SE2d 830 ): "The plaintiff, having plainly and concisely stated the material ultimate facts upon which she intends to recover, is not required to make an exhaustive statement of the exact evidence upon which she relies." Martin v. Bartow Iron Works, 35 Ga. 320, 322 . | 1 | 1964–1964 |
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.