Georgia CommonsBuscar en todas las colecciones
Buscar en Georgia Commons
Proyectos de ley, opiniones de la Corte Suprema, el Código y las dos constituciones, y transcripciones de las reuniones de la Cámara y el Senado, en una sola búsqueda. Pregunte con palabras sencillas: la búsqueda ordena los pasajes por su significado y también por sus palabras.
Filtros:Supreme Court of Georgia 2023 Quitar filtros
Se encontraron 65 documentos.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de agosto de 2023
Reese v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de un hombre del condado de Fulton, rechazando sus reclamos de que el juez de primera instancia debió instruir al jurado sobre legítima defensa y sobre el testimonio de un cómplice, y de que su abogado defensor fue ineficaz.
“A jury instruction on the need for accomplice corroboration should be given if there is slight evidence to support the charge.” Stripling v. State, 304 Ga. 131, 136 (816 SE2d 663) (2018) (citation and punctuation omitted). An accomplice is someone who “shared a common criminal intent to commit the crimes in question with the actual perpetrators.” Ash v....
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de febrero de 2023
WS CE RESORT OWNER, LLC v. HOLLAND
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que los propietarios de viviendas no pueden reclamar una servidumbre en un campo de golf cercano solo porque se etiquetó como 'campo de golf' en un plano de subdivisión y ellos compraron lotes haciendo referencia a ese plano.
These features share two related things in common. First, there is simply a well-settled understanding, reflected in more than a century of our decisions, that when these basic features are designated on a subdivision plat, there is ordinarily no reason to doubt that they are included as part of the unified plan for the subdivision and meant for the lot...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 31 de mayo de 2023
RAFFENSPERGER v. JACKSON (And Vice Versa)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia anuló la Ley de Práctica de Consultores de Lactancia de Georgia, al dictaminar que limitar el trabajo remunerado de cuidado de lactancia a quienes tienen una certificación privada IBCLC viola las protecciones de debido proceso de la constitución estatal para ejercer una ocupación lícita.
research and evidence-based curriculum in a free 16-hour course. Approximately 1,000 individuals have participated in ROSE’s training course. In 2013, the General Assembly first considered a bill that would require lactation care providers to be licensed through the Secretary. See House Bill 363 (2013). Pursuant to OCGA § 43-1A-5 (a) (1), the Georgia...
(A) Lactation assessment through the systematic collection of subjective and objective data; (B) Analysis of data and creation of a lactation care plan; (C) Implementation of a lactation care plan with demonstration and instruction to parents and 6 By specifying that the named services “shall include, but not be limited to,” the list is not exhaustive....
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 24 de octubre de 2023
STATE OF GEORGIA v. SISTERSONG WOMEN OF COLOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE COLLECTIVE
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que la prohibición del aborto a las seis semanas en Georgia no puede anularse por haber sido inconstitucional al momento de su aprobación solo porque entraba en conflicto con Roe v. Wade, decisión que la Corte Suprema de los Estados Unidos revocó después en Dobbs.
ELLINGTON, Justice, dissenting. 1. The trial court correctly granted in part the plaintiffs’ motion for judgment on the pleadings on the basis that Section 4 and Section 11 of the Living Infants Fairness and Equality Act, Ga. L. 2019, p. 711, Act No. 234 (HB 481) (“the 2019 Act”) were void on the date enacted and can never be enforced, despite the...
affirmative duty to declare Georgia laws that violate the United States Constitution or our state Constitution void. See Aycock v. Martin, 37 Ga. 124, 127 (1867) (Because the Georgia Constitution provides that “legislative acts in violation of the Constitution are void, and the judiciary shall so declare them[,]” if the act at issue “is in violation of the...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de agosto de 2023
HENDERSON v. THE STATE (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas por asesinato de Demetre Mason y Frankland Henderson, rechazando impugnaciones sobre pruebas del juicio, la declaración de un coacusado y la decisión de juzgarlos juntos.
But it is not quite so simple. This limiting-instruction fix puts a great deal of faith in the jury’s ability to consider the co-defend- ant’s statement against the co-defendant, but to ignore it entirely when considering the guilt or innocence of the defendant. To be sure, jurors are instructed all the time in our legal system to compart- mentalize in this...
And that determination under Rule 403 was not an abuse of the trial court’s discretion. Evidence that Mason stole the handgun was certainly probative, because it directly connected Mason to the murder weapon. See Jordan v. State, 313 Ga. 841, 845-846 (2) (b) (874 SE2d 67) (2022) (evidence that machine gun and ammunition were stolen four months before...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 18 de abril de 2023
In the Matter of Jason Lee Van Dyke
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia impuso una suspensión de tres años al abogado de Texas Jason Lee Van Dyke por declararse sin admitir culpabilidad en un reporte policial falso, con efecto retroactivo, por lo que queda reincorporado de inmediato.
The Special Master concluded that although the Court has imposed disbarment in cases where a lawyer engages in criminal conduct involving fraud, deceit, or false swearing, see In the Matter of Skandalakis, 279 Ga. 865 (621 SE2d 750) (2005), disbarment is not mandatory in cases involving dishonesty and moral turpitude when mitigating factors warrant a lesser...
3. Analysis Having reviewed the record, we conclude that the Special Master’s recommendation of a three-year suspension is an appropriate penalty in this case. We note, however, that although the Special Master declined to impose reciprocal discipline for the Second Texas Incident and concluded that reciprocal discipline “based upon the remaining...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 31 de mayo de 2023
Knox v. State of Georgia
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que una demanda de cinco profesores del Sistema Universitario que impugnaba la ley de 'armas en el campus' de Georgia de 2017 quedó sin objeto, porque la propia Junta de Regentes adoptó una política que permite armas en el campus conforme a esa ley.
(v) Not apply to faculty, staff, or administrative offices or rooms where disciplinary proceedings are conducted; (vi) Only apply to the carrying of handguns which a licensee is licensed to carry pursuant to subsection (e) of Code Section 16-11-126 and pursuant to Code Section 16-11-129; and (vii) Only apply to the carrying of handguns which are concealed....
Title 20. See also Ga. L. 2022, p. 74, §§ 6, 7 (replacing “license holder” with “lawful weapons carrier” in OCGA §§ 16-11-127 (c) and 16-11-127.1). judgment.” After the governor approved HB 280, the Board’s chancellor provided guidance to USG institutions to “implement the law as written” and called for each institution to “review its campus conduct and...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de marzo de 2023
In the Matter of Willie George Davis, Jr
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia ordenó la inhabilitación del abogado Willie George Davis Jr. tras determinar que manejó indebidamente el patrimonio de su hermana y los fondos en fideicomiso de su sobrino huérfano, y desafió repetidamente las órdenes del tribunal de sucesiones.
(c) Recommendation of Discipline. The Special Master concluded that disbarment remained the presumptive penalty because, sympathy aside, the mitigating factors were not sufficient to offset the aggravating factors. After a review of Davis II and other cases “involving violations of trust accounting rules and [GRPC] Rule 8.4,” the Special Master recommended...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 19 de diciembre de 2023
CLEMENTS v. THE STATE (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas por asesinato de London Clements y Eric Velazquez, ambos relacionados con la muerte a tiros de un agente del condado de Hall durante una serie de robos y una persecución policial en julio de 2019.
With respect to Lee’s testimony regarding the statements Garcia-Solis made to her in the hospital about the defendants’ plan to leave one person “to shoot the cop” while the others ran away, because Garcia-Solis was also on trial, these statements were the “admissions of a party opponent” and were not excluded by the hearsay rule. Lyons, 309 Ga. at 28 (8)...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de agosto de 2023
HOSPITAL AUTHORITY OF WAYNE COUNTY v. AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG CORPORATION
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que la Autoridad Hospitalaria del Condado de Wayne no puede impugnar la constitucionalidad de la ley de Georgia sobre el acuerdo de opioides, porque la ley misma le quita a la autoridad el poder de presentar tales reclamos.
Moreover, to the extent that OCGA § 31-7-75 and the preemption provision could be read as conflicting, the canons of statutory construction dictate that the more recent and specific provisions of the Settlement Act govern over the older and more general provisions of OCGA § 31-7-75. See Bellsouth Telecommunications, LLC v. Cobb County, 305 Ga. 144, 151 (1)...
Act, and in particular, the preemption provision, is unconstitutional because it takes away HAWC’s right to pursue its already-filed lawsuit and thus violates the Georgia Constitution’s prohibition against retroactive laws. See Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. I, Sec. I, Par. X (“Paragraph X”).2 As required by Fed. Rule Civ. P. 5.1,3 HAWC served a copy of its...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 15 de marzo de 2023
TAYLOR, EXR. v. THE DEVEREUX FOUNDATION, INC. (And Vice Versa)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó el límite de $250,000 en daños punitivos de Georgia en un caso de agresión sexual contra un centro de tratamiento de Georgia, y determinó que el límite no viola el derecho a un juicio con jurado, la separación de poderes ni la igualdad de protección ante la ley.
(a) Taylor offers evidence that juries were the arbiters of the large damages awarded in pre-1776 English cases. In all six of the pre-1776 English cases Taylor relies on, the jury decided the damages award—which suggests that the question of damages was a jury question, and one in which English courts were hesitant to meddle. See Beardmore, 95 Eng. Rep. at...
Unlike OCGA § 9-11-68, the Code section at issue in Couch, and many other statutes that provide for attorney fee awards, OCGA § 13-6-11, does not modify the term “the expenses of litigation” with “reasonable” or any similar term.93 Likewise, the predecessors to OCGA § 13-6-11 extending at least back to the 1860 Code of 93 See OCGA § 13-6-11 (1983) (“The...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 16 de agosto de 2023
In the Matter of Andrew Matteson
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia aceptó la petición renovada del abogado Andrew Matteson de una suspensión de seis meses, retroactiva a abril de 2019, después de que presentara pruebas de tratamiento de salud mental y de que reembolsó a los clientes perjudicados por su mala conducta.
Matteson provided with his sworn affidavit, in which he states that from April 2019 through October 2019 he did not work at all, his 2019 income tax returns as evidence that he was not fully employed in 2019. Based on these claims, Matteson now requests as discipline a six-month suspension from the practice of law and that this suspension be imposed nunc...
2 Rule 1.4 (a) provides that a lawyer shall promptly inform the client of any decision or circumstance with respect to which the client’s informed consent is required; shall consult with the client about the means by which his objectives are to be accomplished; shall keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter; shall promptly comply...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 11 de octubre de 2023
In THE MATTER OF RYAN CURTIS CLEVELAND (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia inhabilitó a Ryan Curtis Cleveland después de que abandonara a ocho clientes, incluyendo a un padre que buscaba visitas de custodia y a acusados indigentes en la cárcel, y luego no respondiera al proceso disciplinario del Colegio de Abogados del Estado.
3 Rule 1.5 (a) provides that “[a] lawyer shall not make an agreement for, charge, or collect an unreasonable fee or an unreasonable amount for expenses.” multiple violations of Rules 1.1,4 1.2,5 1.3,6 1.4,7 1.16 (a) and (c),8 3.2,9 8.4 (a) (4),10 and 9.311 of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct 4 Rule 1.1 requires a lawyer to “provide competent...
9 Rule 3.2 provides that “[a] lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation consistent with the interests of the client.” 10 Rule 8.4 (a) (4) provides that a lawyer shall not “engage in professional conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.” Certainly, Cleveland’s knowing misrepresentations about the status of one...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 7 de febrero de 2023
SILLAH v. THE STATE (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó en gran medida las condenas por asesinato de Darnell Sillah y Andrew Murray por matar a un adolescente del condado de Gwinnett, pero dictaminó que dos de las condenas de Sillah por conspiración debieron haberse fusionado con los delitos consumados.
After Sillah’s sentencing, the United States Supreme Court held in Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. 190 (136 SCt 718, 193 LE2d 599) (2016), that Miller was a substantive rule of constitutional law that must be given retroactive effect in state collateral review proceedings. See id. at 212. In concluding that Miller must be applied retroactively, the Court...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 7 de marzo de 2023
Monroe v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas de Steven Monroe por asesinato y delitos relacionados con pandillas por un tiroteo mortal en 2014 en un club nocturno en Homerville, pero encontró errores de sentencia en varios cargos y devolvió el caso para sentencias corregidas.
However, the question of whether the language of subsection (m) provides for separate sentences for violations of different subsections of the Gang Act has not been addressed by this Court. It is well settled that “[t]he legislature remains free under the Double Jeopardy Clause to define crimes and fix punishments.” Brown v. Ohio, 432 U. S. 161, 165 (II)...
OCGA § 16-15-4 (m) states that “[a]ny crime committed in violation of this Code section shall be considered a separate offense.” The plain language of this provision evidences the legislature’s clear intent to designate certain crimes as “separate offense[s]” subject to separate punishments. OCGA § 16-15-4 (m). Those crimes that constitute separate offenses...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 13 de julio de 2023
In the Matter of Keith Chance Hardy
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia inhabilitó al abogado Keith Chance Hardy tras determinar que robó fondos de clientes, abandonó los casos de tres clientes y nunca respondió a la investigación del Colegio de Abogados del Estado.
316 Ga. 845 FINAL COPY S23Y0869. IN THE MATTER OF KEITH CHANCE HARDY.
her family; withheld information from his client and her family about his theft of her funds; and cut off all communications with the client and her family after his theft of her funds. The special master found that Hardy violated Rule 1.4 in SDBD No. 7624 because of the approximately two-year lapse of communications between him and his client; because...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 19 de diciembre de 2023
Beard v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato en la comisión de un delito grave de un hombre del condado de DeKalb por disparar a su esposa, rechazando reclamos de que las instrucciones al jurado eran defectuosas y de que los errores de su abogado de juicio le costaron un juicio justo.
(c) Appellant also points to his trial counsel’s failure to request a no duty to retreat instruction. However, as explained above, Appellant has not shown that the lack of such an instruction affected 2 The current statute governing the admissibility of expert testimony in criminal cases is OCGA § 24-7-702 because the General Assembly repealed former OCGA §...
317 Ga. 842 FINAL COPY S23A0906. BEARD v. THE STATE.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 19 de septiembre de 2023
Roberts v. Cuthpert
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que un hombre que demandó con éxito para obtener una licencia de portación de armas puede buscar el reembolso de sus honorarios de abogado por parte de la jueza de sucesiones que le negó la licencia, porque la ley de Georgia renuncia a la inmunidad soberana para este tipo de reclamos.
Roberts also contends the superior court erred by concluding that the Separation of Powers Provision barred Roberts’s recovery of costs, including reasonable attorney fees, under OCGA § 16-11- 129 (j). In declaring the costs-and-fees provision of OCGA § 16-11- 129 (j) unconstitutional, the superior court concluded that the legislative branch infringed on...
15 There may be other ways for the Separation of Powers Provision to be violated, but the probate judge makes no other argument. 16 We note that while the probate judge argued in his brief that granting or denying an application for a weapons carry license was a judicial function, he makes no separation-of-powers argument concerning the assignment of...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 7 de marzo de 2023
In the Matter of L. Nicole Hamilton
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia impuso una suspensión de seis meses a la abogada L. Nicole Hamilton por no reembolsar con prontitud una tarifa legal no devengada y por demorar el pago de un laudo de arbitraje de honorarios a un excliente.
Accordingly, based on the evidence in the record and the 7 On the other hand, the record does not show that Hamilton has actually engaged in the practice of law during this time period. particular circumstances of this case — where an unusual delay by the State Bar prevented the timely resolution of this matter — we agree with the Special Master that a...
More than three years later, on July 22, 2020, H. Maddox Kilgore, a Coordinating Special Master with the State Bar, filed a motion in this Court, seeking to remove and replace Snipes as the Special Master in this disciplinary matter. In the motion, the Coordinating Special Master asserted that, after Snipes’s appointment by this Court, Snipes was served...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de agosto de 2023
Hatcher v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de un hombre del condado de Liberty por disparar a su esposa, y rechazó su alegato de que su abogado defensor fue ineficaz por no impugnar el testimonio de un perito forense sobre fibras.
317 Ga. 33 FINAL COPY S23A0465. HATCHER v. THE STATE.
One officer went upstairs to the master bedroom and saw Dashea lying in bed in a pool of blood. He saw a gun lying on her abdomen. This officer stood guard to make sure there was no unauthorized entry into the bedroom or any tampering with evidence. He testified that, as his sergeant, other officers, and paramedics arrived, he saw no one touch or move...
Afinar los resultados
Los números cuentan los documentos que encontró esta búsqueda.