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.
8 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 2020–2026 7 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hyden v. Stategreen2 sentences2026“In evaluating a trial court’s decision to deny a speedy appeal claim, we must accept the factual findings of the trial court unless they are clearly erroneous, and we must accept the ultimate conclusion of the trial court unless it amounts to an abuse of discretion.” Hyden v. State, 308 Ga. 218, 224 (2020) (cleaned up). 2026The case was docketed in this Court on March 16, 2026. (b) “In evaluating a trial court’s decision to deny a speedy appeal claim, we must accept the factual findings of the trial court unless they are clearly erroneous, and we must accept the ultimate conclusion of the trial court unless it amounts to an abuse of discretion.” Hyden v. State, 308 Ga. 218, 224 (2020) (cleaned up). | 6 | 6 |
Harper v. Stategreen2 sentences2026And “in a speedy appeal claim … the failure to show actual prejudice from the delay is fatal to the claim[.]” Harper v. State, 318 Ga. 185, 188 (2024) (cleaned up). 2026“However, in a speedy appeal claim, unlike a speedy trial claim, the failure to show actual prejudice from the delay is fatal to the claim, even when the other three factors weigh in the appellant’s 4 This quotation contains Mosley’s entire argument for this enumeration of error. 16 favor.” Id. (quotation marks omitted). | 3 | 4 |
Loadholt v. Stategreen2 sentences2026To demonstrate actual prejudice, an appellant must offer “specific evidence” to prove that “the delay has prejudiced his appeal or that the result of the appeal would have been different but 6 for the delay.” Loadholt v. State, 286 Ga. 402, 406 (2010). 2026To demonstrate actual prejudice, an appellant must offer “specific evidence” to prove that “the delay has prejudiced his appeal or that the result of the appeal would have been different but for the delay.” Loadholt v. State, 286 Ga. 402, 406 (2010). “[G]en- eralized speculation about the delay’s effect on witness memories and evidence is not the kind of ‘specific evidence’ required to show prejudice in the appellate-delay context.” Payne v. State, 289 Ga. 691, 695 (2011). | 2 | 2 |
Payne v. Stategreen1 sentence2026To demonstrate actual prejudice, an appellant must offer “specific evidence” to prove that “the delay has prejudiced his appeal or that the result of the appeal would have been different but for the delay.” Loadholt v. State, 286 Ga. 402, 406 (2010). “[G]en- eralized speculation about the delay’s effect on witness memories and evidence is not the kind of ‘specific evidence’ required to show prejudice in the appellate-delay context.” Payne v. State, 289 Ga. 691, 695 (2011). | 1 | 1 |
Johnson v. Stategreen2 sentences2024However, in a speedy appeal claim, unlike a speedy trial claim, the failure to show actual prejudice from the delay is “fatal to the claim, even when the other three factors weigh in the appellant’s favor.” Veal v. State, 301 Ga. 161, 168 (3) ( 800 SE2d 325 ) (2017), overruled in part on other grounds in Johnson v. State, 315 Ga. 876, 889 (3) n.11 ( 885 SE2d 725 ) (2023). 2024However, in a speedy appeal claim, unlike a speedy trial claim, the failure to show actual prejudice from the delay is “fatal to the claim, even when the other three factors weigh in the appellant’s favor.” Veal v. State, 301 Ga. 161, 168 (3) ( 800 SE2d 325 ) (2017), overruled in part on other grounds in Johnson v. State, 315 Ga. 876, 889 (3) n.11 ( 885 SE2d 725 ) (2023). | 1 | 1 |
Whitaker v. Stategreen2 sentences2024See also Leslie v. State, 292 Ga. 368, 373 (7) ( 738 SE2d 42 ) (2013); Whitaker v. State, 291 Ga. 139, 143-44 (3) ( 728 SE2d 209 ) (2012). 2024See also Leslie v. State, 292 Ga. 368, 373 (7) ( 738 SE2d 42 ) (2013); Whitaker v. State, 291 Ga. 139, 143-44 (3) ( 728 SE2d 209 ) (2012). | 1 | 1 |
Leslie v. Stategreen2 sentences2024See also Leslie v. State, 292 Ga. 368, 373 (7) ( 738 SE2d 42 ) (2013); Whitaker v. State, 291 Ga. 139, 143-44 (3) ( 728 SE2d 209 ) (2012). 2024See also Leslie v. State, 292 Ga. 368, 373 (7) ( 738 SE2d 42 ) (2013); Whitaker v. State, 291 Ga. 139, 143-44 (3) ( 728 SE2d 209 ) (2012). | 1 | 1 |
Veal v. Stategreen2 sentences2024However, in a speedy appeal claim, unlike a speedy trial claim, the failure to show actual prejudice from the delay is “fatal to the claim, even when the other three factors weigh in the appellant’s favor.” Veal v. State, 301 Ga. 161, 168 (3) ( 800 SE2d 325 ) (2017), overruled in part on other grounds in Johnson v. State, 315 Ga. 876, 889 (3) n.11 ( 885 SE2d 725 ) (2023). 2024However, in a speedy appeal claim, unlike a speedy trial claim, the failure to show actual prejudice from the delay is “fatal to the claim, even when the other three factors weigh in the appellant’s favor.” Veal v. State, 301 Ga. 161, 168 (3) ( 800 SE2d 325 ) (2017), overruled in part on other grounds in Johnson v. State, 315 Ga. 876, 889 (3) n.11 ( 885 SE2d 725 ) (2023). | 1 | 1 |
De La Cruz v. Stategreen2 sentences2020In evaluating a trial court’s decision to deny a speedy appeal claim, “we must accept the factual findings of the trial court unless they are clearly erroneous, and we must accept the ultimate conclusion of the trial court unless it amounts to an abuse of discretion.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) De La Cruz v. State, 303 Ga. 24, 30 (6) ( 810 SE2d 84 ) (2018). (a) Length of the Delay. 2020In evaluating a trial court’s decision to deny a speedy appeal claim, “we must accept the factual findings of the trial court unless they are clearly erroneous, and we must accept the ultimate conclusion of the trial court unless it amounts to an abuse of discretion.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) De La Cruz v. State, 303 Ga. 24, 30 (6) ( 810 SE2d 84 ) (2018). (a) Length of the Delay. | 1 | 1 |
Chatman v. Mancillgreen1 sentence2020“The length of delay that will provoke a constitutional inquiry is necessarily dependent upon the peculiar circumstances of the case.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) 13 Chatman, supra, 280 Ga. at 257 (2) (b). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Barker v. Wingo
green
2 sentences2026In assessing a speedy appeal claim, we apply the four-factor balancing test applicable to speedy trial claims set forth in Barker v. Wingo, 407 US 514 (1972), looking to the length of the delay, the reason for the delay, the defendant’s assertion of his right to a speedy appeal, and the resulting prejudice. 2026In assessing a speedy appeal claim, we apply the four-factor balancing test applicable to speedy trial claims set forth in Barker v. Wingo, 407 US 514 (1972), looking to the length of the delay, the reason for the delay, the defendant’s assertion of his right to a speedy appeal, and the resulting prejudice. | 4 | 2026–2026 |