Syfert Injury Law Firm
Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448The court may consider the failure to comply with the requirements of this chapter with respect to any challenge to an identification; provided, however, that such failure shall not mandate the exclusion of identification evidence.
(Code 1981, §17-20-3, enacted by Ga. L. 2015, p. 1046, § 4/SB 94.)
- Criminal defendant's age or height as factor in determination of whether circumstances of witness's identification of defendant in photographic array shown by police to witness were impermissibly suggestive as matter of federal constitutional law, 102 A.L.R.6th 365.
Total Results: 5
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-06-11
Snippet: with the adoption of OCGA §§ 17-20-1 through 17-20-3, “the Georgia General Assembly has prioritized
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2022-05-03
Snippet: Kirkland, 310 Ga. at 741-742 (2) (a) (citing OCGA § 17-20-3). 16 Fletcher’s
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2022-02-15
Snippet: (2) (a) (854 SE2d 508) (2021); see also OCGA § 17-20-3. 23 photographic
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2021-02-01
Snippet: does not require automatic exclusion. See OCGA § 17-20-3 (“The court may consider the failure to comply
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2019-02-04
Citation: 823 S.E.2d 758, 305 Ga. 73
Snippet: Criminal Procedure Code, OCGA §§ 17-20-1 through 17-20-3, effective July 1, 2016, which requires any law