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 2021 Quitar filtros
Se encontraron 121 documentos.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 14 de diciembre de 2021
Bell v. Hargrove
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que un juez de sucesiones no puede negar una licencia para portar armas solo porque un informe de antecedentes penales deja poco claro el resultado de un arresto antiguo. El juez debe tener prueba real de una condena que descalifique, no mera especulación.
COLVIN, Justice. Georgia law generally requires a person to apply for and receive a valid weapons carry license from a probate judge before carrying a handgun or other weapon in public. 1 The General Assembly has identified specific categories of people to whom “[n]o weapons carry license shall be issued,” including people with certain criminal convictions....
1 “No person shall carry a weapon without a valid weapons carry license unless he or she meets one of the exceptions to having such license as provided in subsections (a) through (g) of this Code section.” OCGA § 16-11-126 (h) (1). See also OCGA § 16-11-125.1 (5) (defining “weapon” as including handguns). Under the enumerated exceptions, if certain...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de junio de 2021
Kinslow v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia revocó la condena por allanamiento informático grave de un trabajador de TI de Norcross, dictaminando que copiar y reenviar los correos electrónicos de su jefe a su propia cuenta no constituía legalmente 'interferir' con los datos según el estatuto.
If OCGA § 16-9-93 (b) (2) is as broad as the State suggests, “obstructing” and “interrupting” become entirely surplusage and redundant; in such an event, the relevant text would need to list only “interfering.”5 We should presume that the General Assembly 5 Such a construction of OCGA § 16-9-93 (b) (2) also would potentially render superfluous other...
the City’s computer network to copy and forward Cothran’s e-mails with the intention of examining Cothran’s personal data. The other provisions of OCGA § 16-9-93 are broad and provide ample means to deter and punish a wide range of conduct, without expanding the meaning of “interfering” as used in OCGA § 16-9-93 (b) (2). Even ascribing to “interfering” the...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 5 de abril de 2021
Byers v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas de Christopher Byers por asesinato y agresión agravada en el asesinato con un hacha de Ray Walnoha, pero determinó que su condena por manipulación de pruebas por delito grave debió haber sido un delito menor y devolvió esa parte del caso para una nueva sentencia.
2 OCGA § 16-11-62 (1) prohibits “[a]ny person in a clandestine manner intentionally to overhear, transmit, or record or attempt to overhear, transmit, or record the private conversation of another which shall originate in any private place[.]” Since 2015, before the overhearing at issue in this case, “private place” has been defined for purposes of this...
3 Byers does not challenge the State’s standing to seek exclusion of Wesley’s testimony. OCGA § 16-11-67 provides that “[n]o evidence obtained in a manner which violates any of the provisions of this part [which includes OCGA § 16-11-62] shall be admissible in any court of this state except to prove violations of this part.” We previously held that Fourth...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de junio de 2021
Wilson v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas de un padrastro por abusar sexualmente de su hijastra de 13 años, y determinó que la evidencia de que él había abusado de su media hermana menor décadas atrás, cuando él mismo era un niño, fue admitida correctamente en el juicio.
(c) This Code section shall not be the exclusive means to admit or consider evidence described under this Code section. (d) As used in this Code section, the term “offense of child molestation” means any conduct or attempt or conspiracy to engage in: (1) Conduct that would be a violation of Code Section 16-6-4, 16-6-5, 16-12-100, 16-12-100.2, or...
1. Wilson contends that the evidence of his alleged prior offenses of child molestation involving P. W. did not satisfy the requirements for admission pursuant to Rule 414. Specifically, he argues that, because he was between the ages of 11 and 13 when the alleged prior offenses occurred, either he lacked the capacity to commit a crime under OCGA § 16-3-1,3...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de junio de 2021
STAR RESIDENTIAL, LLC v. HERNANDEZ
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que una víctima de un tiroteo no podía demandar al propietario y operador de su complejo de apartamentos por daños triplicados bajo la ley estatal contra pandillas, porque esa ley solo permite a las víctimas demandar a los miembros de pandillas que realmente causaron sus lesiones.
Separate from the nuisance abatement action created by subsections (a) and (b) for certain public officials, the next cause of action created by OCGA § 16-15-7 is defined in subsection (c). That subsection provides that “[a]ny person who is injured by reason of criminal gang activity shall have a cause of action for three times the actual damages sustained...
2. The Court of Appeals also erred in its interpretation of the following language of OCGA § 16-15-7 (c): No judgment shall be awarded unless the finder of fact determines that the action is consistent with the intent of the General Assembly as set forth in Code Section 16-15- 2. (Emphasis supplied). The Court of Appeals reasoned that this language...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 14 de diciembre de 2021
Floyd v. Stone
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia se negó a permitir que una ciudadana demandara para destituir a un juez de tribunal superior por reclamos de que el Gobernador tardó demasiado en nombrarlo, dictaminando que la destitución no es el remedio correcto aunque la demora haya violado la constitución.
313 Ga. 16 FINAL COPY S21A1123. FLOYD v. STONE.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de junio de 2021
Merritt 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 Polk que le disparó a su esposa, al concluir que la evidencia era suficiente y que los errores del juicio no afectaron el resultado.
5. Prior to trial, the State filed a notice of intent to present testimony pursuant to the residual hearsay exception, see OCGA § 24-8-807,4 through lay witnesses Andrea Lyle, Mercer, and Jeffrey 3 Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (86 SCt 1602, 16 LE2d 694) (1966). 4 OCGA § 24-8-807 states in pertinent part: A statement not specifically covered by any law...
Jeffrey, Rita’s sister-in-law, testified that she had a good relationship with Rita, that they spoke on a regular basis, and that Rita shared personal information with her, including information about Rita’s marriage. Jeffrey testified that Rita would call her crying because Merritt called her a “sorry mother” and a “b**ch,” that Rita expressed concerns...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 2 de noviembre de 2021
Ash v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de Jabarri Ash por la muerte a tiros de Mario Shaw, rechazando sus objeciones sobre decisiones probatorias, instrucciones al jurado y alegaciones de que la policía destruyó indebidamente su teléfono celular.
OCGA § 24-14-8 provides, in relevant part, that “[t]he testimony of a single witness is generally sufficient to establish a fact. However, in . . . felony cases where the only witness is an accomplice, the testimony of a single witness shall not be sufficient.” Under this rule, the Court has stated that where an accomplice testifies at trial, a jury may not...
Here, based on the standard outlined above, there was no evidence presented at trial that obviously called for the giving of an accomplice-corroboration charge. Although Ash notes that both Terrell and Minor believed Shaw should have taken responsibility for Jonathan Ash’s drug charges, Ash has pointed to no evidence that Minor or Terrell shared Ash’s...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 11 de enero de 2021
Palmer v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de un hombre de Savannah, rechazando sus objeciones al registro de su apartamento, la exclusión de un posible testimonio de coartada, y su reclamo de que su abogado de juicio fue ineficaz.
But even assuming, without deciding, that the existence of an intentional or reckless falsehood could be established under Franks, the trial court correctly concluded that “the affidavit’s remaining content” was sufficient to establish probable cause independently of any knowledge on Bates’ part that a body had been discovered. Palmer and Whitsett were...
As this Court recently explained, the particularity requirement must be applied with a practical margin of flexibility, depending on the type of property to be seized, and a description of property will be acceptable if it is as specific as the circumstances and nature of activity under investigation permit. (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Rickman v....
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 14 de diciembre de 2021
Bates 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 Barrow por disparar a su vecino y al perro del vecino, rechazando las cuatro alegaciones de que sus abogados de juicio brindaron una representación constitucionalmente inadecuada.
313 Ga. 57 FINAL COPY S21A1188. BATES v. THE STATE.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 11 de enero de 2021
Nesby 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 DeKalb, al determinar que las conferencias en el estrado no grabadas y realizadas fuera de su presencia durante el juicio no violaron su derecho constitucional a estar presente.
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: January 11, 2021 S21A0207. NESBY v. THE STATE.
However, a defendant’s presence at bench conferences that deal with questions of law and consist of “essentially legal argument about which the defendant presumably has no knowledge,” or those that deal with logistical and procedural matters, “bears no relation, reasonably substantial, to the fullness of his opportunity to defend against the charge[.]”...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 2 de noviembre de 2021
Stafford 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 Fulton, al concluir que aunque se admitió incorrectamente cierta evidencia en el juicio, esto no afectó el resultado dada la solidez de las demás pruebas en su contra.
312 Ga. 811 FINAL COPY S21A0767. STAFFORD v. THE STATE.
Appellant and Spencer. After a review of Appellant’s social media accounts, the police determined that Appellant was flying from Denver to Atlanta. Appellant was arrested at the Denver airport on January 13, 2016. Spencer turned himself in at a police station in Washington, D.C. At some point during the investigation, Clark sought to provide the police with...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 5 de octubre de 2021
Overstreet v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas de un hombre del condado de Ben Hill por asesinato y delitos de pandillas en la muerte por disparos de un ganador de la lotería, rechazando reclamos sobre pruebas débiles, testimonio perjudicial y la falla de su abogado en solicitar un nuevo lugar de juicio.
312 Ga. 565 FINAL COPY S21A0712. OVERSTREET v. THE STATE.
Regarding the third element, the evidence presented at trial authorized the jury to determine that Overstreet committed both predicate offenses for the Gang Act violations with which he was charged. From the evidence presented at trial, the jury was authorized to determine that Overstreet committed the offenses of home invasion (as defined in OCGA § 16-7-5)...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 2 de noviembre de 2021
Schoicket v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia resolvió que una mujer que se declaró culpable de asesinato con circunstancias agravantes no puede usar su apelación fuera de plazo concedida por el tribunal como una vía para también presentar una moción tardía de retiro de su declaración de culpabilidad, aunque corrigió un error en su sentencia por un cargo separado.
34 See OCGA § 9-14-40 et seq.
As we observed in Collier, for decades we have allowed an alternative method to co-exist for a defendant to obtain an out-of- time appeal from a judgment of conviction, despite the principle that “courts have no authority to create equitable exceptions to jurisdictional requirements imposed by statute.” Collier v. State, 307 Ga. 363, 371 (1) (834 SE2d 769)...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 17 de mayo de 2021
MOORE v. THE STATE (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas por asesinato de Simeon Moore y Walter Milbourne por un robo a mano armada en el condado de Cobb que dejó a una víctima muerta por disparo y a otra herida, rechazando los cuestionamientos a la evidencia, el proceso del juicio con jurado y la representación legal.
(8) Any special circumstances of the parties, victims, witnesses, or other participants such as the need to protect children or factors involving the safety of participants in the judicial proceeding; and (9) Any other factors which the court may determine to be important under the circumstances of the case. (c) The court may hear from the parties,...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 1 de febrero de 2021
Allen v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena de Alfredo Allen por asesinato con malicia por apuñalar hasta la muerte a la hermana de su ex novia, rechazando su alegato de que el jurado debía haber encontrado homicidio voluntario en su lugar.
Viewed in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, the evidence showed that Allen and Candice began dating in 2012 and had a child together in 2013. They lived together in an apartment in Gwinnett County with their child and Candice’s child from a previous relationship. Candice testified that her relationship with Allen began to deteriorate because...
310 Ga. 743 FINAL COPY S21A0256. ALLEN v. THE STATE.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 23 de noviembre de 2021
SPANN v. DAVIS
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que un tribunal de primera instancia no podía, por su propia cuenta, desestimar la demanda de una mujer arrestada injustamente basándose en inmunidad cuasi judicial cuando los secretarios del tribunal nunca invocaron esa defensa.
Of its seven enumerated defenses, OCGA § 9-11-12 (h) (1) specifies that four — lack of jurisdiction over the person, improper venue, insufficiency of process, and insufficiency of service of process 7 Unlike OCGA § 9-11-8 (c), the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure include a catch-all introductory provision that covers all possible affirmative defenses. See...
defense to a claim to be made in any pleading permitted or ordered under OCGA § 9-11-7 (a) or by motion for judgment on the pleadings, or at the trial on the merits. Here, the Clerks did not assert the defense of quasi-judicial immunity in their responsive pleading or by motion. Although OCGA §§ 9-11-8 and 9-11-12 generally require defenses to be asserted...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 11 de enero de 2021
Harper 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 por la muerte de su novia, dictaminando que sus entrevistas con la policía fueron admitidas correctamente en el juicio y no fueron producto de un interrogatorio bajo custodia ilegal ni de un arresto inválido.
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: January 11, 2021 S20A1288. HARPER v. THE STATE.
2. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in failing to suppress his March 6, 2011 interview, asserting that he was in custody and spoke without a valid waiver of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (86 SCt 1602, 16 LE2d 694) (1966). A person is considered to be in custody and Miranda warnings are required when a person is (1) formally...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 14 de diciembre de 2021
RCC WESLEY CHAPEL CROSSING, LLC v. ALLEN
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que los propietarios privados no tienen ningún derecho de derecho consuetudinario para inmovilizar con cepos u otros medios vehículos estacionados sin permiso, pero devolvió una demanda colectiva sobre dicha práctica para su nueva revisión.
(b) Trial court proceedings. In February 2018, Plaintiff filed a lawsuit in the State Court of Clayton County on behalf of himself and a putative class of similarly situated persons against Defendants RCC Wesley Chapel Crossing, LLC, Little Giant Farmers Market Corporation, Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., River City Capital, LLC, and River City Capital Property...
the reason for distraining the cattle, rather than bringing an action at law for the damages, arises from the necessity of the thing itself, as it might otherwise be impossible at a future time to ascertain whose cattle they were that committed the trespass or damage. Id. at 15-16 (punctuation omitted). The court held that the doctrine did not apply to an...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 5 de octubre de 2021
COLLINS v. THE STATE (Three Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas por asesinato de tres hombres juzgados juntos por la muerte a tiros de Milton Carl Kelley, y rechazó impugnaciones a las instrucciones al jurado, la negativa a un juicio por separado y las alegaciones de mal desempeño de sus abogados.
312 Ga. 727 FINAL COPY S21A0627. COLLINS v. THE STATE. S21A0628. BURDINE v. THE STATE. S21A0629. LOVE v. THE STATE.
Let me give you the answer the law allows me to give you. I have read you the charge and I have given you the charge. To the extent there is an answer, it is in the charge. I cannot say, “look here” or “look there,” because then I’m favoring one part of the body of this charge over another. And I didn’t want to read the whole thing out for another 45...
Afinar los resultados
Los números cuentan los documentos que encontró esta búsqueda.