Miller v. State, 319 S.E.2d 79 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984). · Go Syfert
Search
Miller v. State, 319 S.E.2d 79 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
5 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Lemarr v. State (gactapp, 1988-09-09)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Lemarr v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 1988 · confidence medium
Obstruction of an officer requires proof of different elements not included in terroristic threats, to wit, “there must be some evidence of forcible resistance or objection to the officer (not mere argument) in the performance of his duties. [Cit.]” Kelley v. State, 171 Ga. App. 222, 223 ( 319 SE2d 81 ) (1984).
discussed Cited "see" Strickland v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 1996 · signal: see · confidence high
See Kelley v. State, 171 Ga. App. 222, 223 ( 319 SE2d 81 ) (1984); Moccia v. State, 174 Ga. App. 764, 765 ( 331 SE2d 99 ) (1985); Cason v. State, 197 Ga. *519 App. 308 ( 398 SE2d 292 ) (1990), overruled as to misdemeanor obstruction, Duke v. State, 205 Ga. App. 689, 690 ( 423 SE2d 427 ) (1992).
discussed Cited "see" Gerald Fred Webb v. William P. Ethridge and Charles Gay
11th Cir. · 1988 · signal: see · confidence high
See Moccia v. State, 174 Ga.App. 764 , 331 S.E.2d 99, 101 (1985). “ ‘It can hardly be said, fairly, to be resisting or opposing an officer to argue with him, unless that argument becomes violent so as to amount to something calculated to force the officer to desist.’ ” Id. (quoting Statham v. State, 41 Ga. 507, 512-13 (1871)). “[T]o obstruct an officer there must be some evidence of forcible resistance or objection to the officer (not mere argument) in the performance of his duties.” Kelley v. State, 171 Ga.App. 222 , 319 S.E.2d 81, 82 (1984); accord McCook v. State, 145 Ga.App. 3 …
MILLER
v.
State
68600.
Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Jun 15, 1984.
319 S.E.2d 79
J. Robert Daniel, for appellant., Willis B. Sparks III, District Attorney, Virgil L. Adams, Thomas J. Matthews, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellee.
Deen.
Published
Deen, Presiding Judge.

The appellant sought and was granted a certificate of immediate review from the trial court to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress evidence, but failed to make application to this court for permission to file an interlocutory appeal as required by OCGA § 5-6-34 (b). The appellee’s motion to dismiss this direct appeal for lack of jurisdiction must therefore be granted. See Echols v. State, 163 Ga. App. 905 (296 SE2d 366) (1982).

Appeal dismissed.

McMurray, C. J., and Sognier, J., concur.