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 1979–2021 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Anderson v. Stategreen2 sentences2021The juror further testified that he and Bradley were not close friends and did not socialize outside of work, 6 and that he had no knowledge of her reputation as a mother.2 In its order denying Tyson’s motion for new trial, the trial court specifically found that the juror “disclosed his knowledge and work relationship with the victim’s mother.” As Tyson acknowledges, in order to obtain a new trial based on juror misconduct in voir dire, he must show that “(1) the juror failed to answer honestly a material question on voir dire and (2) a correct response would have provided a valid basis for a 2021The juror further testified that he and Bradley were not close friends and did not socialize outside of work, 6 and that he had no knowledge of her reputation as a mother.2 In its order denying Tyson’s motion for new trial, the trial court specifically found that the juror “disclosed his knowledge and work relationship with the victim’s mother.” As Tyson acknowledges, in order to obtain a new trial based on juror misconduct in voir dire, he must show that “(1) the juror failed to answer honestly a material question on voir dire and (2) a correct response would have provided a valid basis for a | 1 | 1 |
Veal v. Stategreen2 sentences2021He estimated that at the time of trial, he saw her approximately three days a week. 3 The Attorney General’s contention that Tyson’s claim is not preserved due to his failure to make a contemporaneous motion to excuse the juror, see Veal v. State, 301 Ga. 161, 163 (2) ( 800 SE2d 325 ) (2017), is without merit because Tyson alleges here that the juror concealed information during questioning. 2021He estimated that at the time of trial, he saw her approximately three days a week. 3 The Attorney General’s contention that Tyson’s claim is not preserved due to his failure to make a contemporaneous motion to excuse the juror, see Veal v. State, 301 Ga. 161, 163 (2) ( 800 SE2d 325 ) (2017), is without merit because Tyson alleges here that the juror concealed information during questioning. | 1 | 1 |
Glover v. Stategreen2 sentences2021See also Glover v. State, 274 Ga. 213, 214 (2) ( 552 SE2d 804 ) (2001).3 2 At the time of the hearing on Tyson’s motion for new trial, the juror was the administrator of the nursing home and its custodian of records. 2021See also Glover v. State, 274 Ga. 213, 214 (2) ( 552 SE2d 804 ) (2001).3 2 At the time of the hearing on Tyson’s motion for new trial, the juror was the administrator of the nursing home and its custodian of records. | 1 | 1 |
Carter v. Stategreen2 sentences2021See Carter v. State, 310 Ga. 559, 564 (2) (a) ( 852 SE2d 542 ) (2020); see also Johnson v. State, 310 Ga. 685, 691-692 (3) ( 853 SE2d 635 ) (2021) (counsel not ineffective in failing to make meritless motion or objection). 7. 2021See Carter v. State, 310 Ga. 559, 564 (2) (a) ( 852 SE2d 542 ) (2020); see also Johnson v. State, 310 Ga. 685, 691-692 (3) ( 853 SE2d 635 ) (2021) (counsel not ineffective in failing to make meritless motion or objection). 7. | 1 | 1 |
Snipes v. Stategreen1 sentence2021See Snipes, 309 Ga. at 792 (3) (b) (i). 18 Counsel had made an earlier motion in limine, before the first witness was called, with respect to any testimony regarding Tyson’s demeanor. | 1 | 1 |
Johnson v. Stategreen2 sentences2021See Carter v. State, 310 Ga. 559, 564 (2) (a) ( 852 SE2d 542 ) (2020); see also Johnson v. State, 310 Ga. 685, 691-692 (3) ( 853 SE2d 635 ) (2021) (counsel not ineffective in failing to make meritless motion or objection). 7. 2021See Carter v. State, 310 Ga. 559, 564 (2) (a) ( 852 SE2d 542 ) (2020); see also Johnson v. State, 310 Ga. 685, 691-692 (3) ( 853 SE2d 635 ) (2021) (counsel not ineffective in failing to make meritless motion or objection). 7. | 1 | 1 |
Boyle v. State of Georgiagreen1 sentence2020See Boyle, 190 Ga. App. at 734 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Mooregreen2 sentences2001Tyson’s motion is easily denied by relying on this Court’s statute-based decision in State v. Moore, 237 Ga. 269, 272 ( 227 SE2d 241 ) (1976), where this Court was faced with the identical issue and interpreted the statute in a manner that did not endanger this Court’s constitutional power. 2001Tyson’s motion is easily denied by relying on this Court’s statute-based decision in State v. Moore, 237 Ga. 269, 272 ( 227 SE2d 241 ) (1976), where this Court was faced with the identical issue and interpreted the statute in a manner that did not endanger this Court’s constitutional power. | 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 sentences2021“Substantial delays in the appellate process implicate due process rights, and we review appellate due process claims under the four-factor analysis used for speedy trial claims set forth in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U. S. 514 ( 92 SCt 2182 , 33 LE2d 101) (1972).” Veal v. State, 301 Ga. 161, 167 (3) ( 800 SE2d 325 ) (2017). 2021“Substantial delays in the appellate process implicate due process rights, and we review appellate due process claims under the four-factor analysis used for speedy trial claims set forth in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U. S. 514 ( 92 SCt 2182 , 33 LE2d 101) (1972).” Veal v. State, 301 Ga. 161, 167 (3) ( 800 SE2d 325 ) (2017). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Simpson v. State
green
2 sentences2000Under Simpson v. State, 271 Ga. 772 ( 523 SE2d 320 ) (1999), evidence of sexual paraphernalia found in the defendant’s possession must show his lustful disposition or bent of mind toward engaging in the type of sexual activity with which he is charged before it is admissible. 2000Under Simpson v. State, 271 Ga. 772 ( 523 SE2d 320 ) (1999), evidence of sexual paraphernalia found in the defendant’s possession must show his lustful disposition or bent of mind toward engaging in the type of sexual activity with which he is charged before it is admissible. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Olsen v. Nebraska Ex Rel. Western Reference & Bond Assn., Inc.
green
2 sentences1979Although this legislation was essentially identical to the statute rejected in Tyson, the court held that the Supreme Court’s previous decision did not bar the reconsideration of this question by the district court because the Tyson test had been repudiated, citing Nebbia, Olsen v. Nebraska, 313 U.S. 236 (61 SC 862, 85 LE 1305) (1949), and Ferguson v. Skrupa, 372 U. S. 726 (83 SC 1028, 10 LE2d 93) (1963). 1979Although this legislation was essentially identical to the statute rejected in Tyson, the court held that the Supreme Court’s previous decision did not bar the reconsideration of this question by the district court because the Tyson test had been repudiated, citing Nebbia, Olsen v. Nebraska, 313 U.S. 236 (61 SC 862, 85 LE 1305) (1949), and Ferguson v. Skrupa, 372 U. S. 726 (83 SC 1028, 10 LE2d 93) (1963). | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Ferguson v. Skrupa
green
2 sentences1979Although this legislation was essentially identical to the statute rejected in Tyson, the court held that the Supreme Court’s previous decision did not bar the reconsideration of this question by the district court because the Tyson test had been repudiated, citing Nebbia, Olsen v. Nebraska, 313 U.S. 236 (61 SC 862, 85 LE 1305) (1949), and Ferguson v. Skrupa, 372 U. S. 726 (83 SC 1028, 10 LE2d 93) (1963). 1979Although this legislation was essentially identical to the statute rejected in Tyson, the court held that the Supreme Court’s previous decision did not bar the reconsideration of this question by the district court because the Tyson test had been repudiated, citing Nebbia, Olsen v. Nebraska, 313 U.S. 236 (61 SC 862, 85 LE 1305) (1949), and Ferguson v. Skrupa, 372 U. S. 726 (83 SC 1028, 10 LE2d 93) (1963). | 1 | 1979–1979 |
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.