testimony under the necessity exception (Georgia) · Go Syfert
← Georgia issues

testimony under the necessity exception in Georgia

5 Georgia opinions name it 1 courts 2006–2013 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.

Followed or applied (6)

CaseFollowedCited
Evans v. Stategreen
ga · 2011 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
2 sentences

2013For non-testimonial hearsay evidence to be admissible under the necessity exception, not only must the declarant be unavailable and his statement be relevant to a material fact and be more probative as to that fact than other evidence that may be procured and offered, but the statement also must exhibit “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.” McNaughton v. State, 290 Ga. 894, 897-898 (3) (b) ( 725 SE2d 590 ) (2012); Evans v. State, 288 Ga. 571, 572 (2) ( 707 SE2d 353 ) (2011).

2013For non-testimonial hearsay evidence to be admissible under the necessity exception, not only must the declarant be unavailable and his statement be relevant to a material fact and be more probative as to that fact than other evidence that may be procured and offered, but the statement also must exhibit “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.” McNaughton v. State, 290 Ga. 894, 897-898 (3) (b) ( 725 SE2d 590 ) (2012); Evans v. State, 288 Ga. 571, 572 (2) ( 707 SE2d 353 ) (2011).

11
McNaughton v. Stategreen
ga · 2012 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
2 sentences

2013For non-testimonial hearsay evidence to be admissible under the necessity exception, not only must the declarant be unavailable and his statement be relevant to a material fact and be more probative as to that fact than other evidence that may be procured and offered, but the statement also must exhibit “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.” McNaughton v. State, 290 Ga. 894, 897-898 (3) (b) ( 725 SE2d 590 ) (2012); Evans v. State, 288 Ga. 571, 572 (2) ( 707 SE2d 353 ) (2011).

2013For non-testimonial hearsay evidence to be admissible under the necessity exception, not only must the declarant be unavailable and his statement be relevant to a material fact and be more probative as to that fact than other evidence that may be procured and offered, but the statement also must exhibit “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.” McNaughton v. State, 290 Ga. 894, 897-898 (3) (b) ( 725 SE2d 590 ) (2012); Evans v. State, 288 Ga. 571, 572 (2) ( 707 SE2d 353 ) (2011).

11
Brooks v. Stategreen
ga · 2007 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012Brooks v. State, 281 Ga. 514, 517-518 (4) ( 640 SE2d 280 ) (2007).

2012Brooks v. State, 281 Ga. 514, 517-518 (4) ( 640 SE2d 280 ) (2007).

11
Azizi v. Stategreen
ga · 1999 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
2 sentences

2009There are two requirements under the necessity exception, “necessity” and “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.” Azizi v. State, 270 Ga. 709, 711 (2) ( 512 SE2d 622 ) (1999).

2009There are two requirements under the necessity exception, “necessity” and “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.” Azizi v. State, 270 Ga. 709, 711 (2) ( 512 SE2d 622 ) (1999).

11
Watson v. Stategreen
ga · 2004 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
2 sentences

2007In order for hearsay to be admitted under the necessity exception, two requirements must be satisfied: “necessity” and “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.” [Cits.] “Necessity” is demonstrated when the declarant is deceased, when the statement is shown to be relevant to a material fact, and when the statement is more probative of the material fact than other evidence that may be produced and offered. [Cit.] The requirement of “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness” is satisfied when the declaration is coupled with “circumstances which attribute verity to [the declaration].” [C

2007In order for hearsay to be admitted under the necessity exception, two requirements must be satisfied: “necessity” and “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.” [Cits.] “Necessity” is demonstrated when the declarant is deceased, when the statement is shown to be relevant to a material fact, and when the statement is more probative of the material fact than other evidence that may be produced and offered. [Cit.] The requirement of “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness” is satisfied when the declaration is coupled with “circumstances which attribute verity to [the declaration].” [C

11
Chapel v. Stategreen
ga · 1998 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006
2 sentences

2006See generally Chapel v. State, 270 Ga. 151, 155 (4) ( 510 SE2d 802 ) (1998).

2006See generally Chapel v. State, 270 Ga. 151, 155 (4) ( 510 SE2d 802 ) (1998).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Turner v. State green
ga · 2007
2 sentences

2007Turner v. State, 281 Ga. 647 (3) (a) ( 641 SE2d 527 ) (2007) (consistent statements to close friends in whom victim confided both at work and as confidants outside of work carried particularized guarantees of trustworthiness); McPherson v. State, 274 Ga. 444 (10) ( 553 SE2d 569 ) (2001) (circumstantial guaranty of trustworthiness shown by testimony that witnesses were close friends in whom victim routinely confided with respect to personal life). *332 3.

2007Turner v. State, 281 Ga. 647 (3) (a) ( 641 SE2d 527 ) (2007) (consistent statements to close friends in whom victim confided both at work and as confidants outside of work carried particularized guarantees of trustworthiness); McPherson v. State, 274 Ga. 444 (10) ( 553 SE2d 569 ) (2001) (circumstantial guaranty of trustworthiness shown by testimony that witnesses were close friends in whom victim routinely confided with respect to personal life). *332 3.

12007–2007
McPherson v. State green
ga · 2001
2 sentences

2007Turner v. State, 281 Ga. 647 (3) (a) ( 641 SE2d 527 ) (2007) (consistent statements to close friends in whom victim confided both at work and as confidants outside of work carried particularized guarantees of trustworthiness); McPherson v. State, 274 Ga. 444 (10) ( 553 SE2d 569 ) (2001) (circumstantial guaranty of trustworthiness shown by testimony that witnesses were close friends in whom victim routinely confided with respect to personal life). *332 3.

2007Turner v. State, 281 Ga. 647 (3) (a) ( 641 SE2d 527 ) (2007) (consistent statements to close friends in whom victim confided both at work and as confidants outside of work carried particularized guarantees of trustworthiness); McPherson v. State, 274 Ga. 444 (10) ( 553 SE2d 569 ) (2001) (circumstantial guaranty of trustworthiness shown by testimony that witnesses were close friends in whom victim routinely confided with respect to personal life). *332 3.

12007–2007

Statutes the citing opinions construe

GA § 24-3-1 (3)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check