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 83 documentos.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de febrero de 2023
Bowman v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que el juicio de 2014 de un hombre del condado de Paulding nunca ocurrió ante la ley, porque los 12 ciudadanos que escucharon su caso nunca fueron juramentados como jurado, por lo que él tiene derecho a ser liberado y absuelto conforme a la ley de juicio rápido de Georgia.
On November 27, 2019, through new counsel, Bowman filed a motion for discharge and acquittal on statutory and constitutional speedy trial grounds. On the same day, the State filed a motion seeking a declaratory order that the December 2014 proceeding “constitute[d] a trial” for the purpose of satisfying Bowman’s Demand for Speedy Trial pursuant to OCGA §...
We granted Bowman’s petition for certiorari and posed the following question: Was [Bowman] deprived of his statutory or constitutional right to a speedy trial where the trial he received was held before a jury that had not sworn the oath required by OCGA § 15-12-139? The case was orally argued in this Court on September 20, 2022. 2. The dispute in this case...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 7 de febrero de 2023
Rucker v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de un hombre por una invasión a un hogar con resultado de muerte en el suroeste de Atlanta, rechazando sus argumentos sobre una instrucción faltante al jurado y un juicio retrasado.
(c) Assertion of the right. The trial court weighed Rucker’s delay in asserting his right to a speedy trial heavily against him. Rucker argues that the trial court erred in this regard because, although he did not assert his right to a speedy trial until he filed his motion to dismiss the indictment on April 13, 2017, he was not served with initial...
We cannot say that the trial court erred in reaching this determination. Because delay often works to a defendant’s advantage, “the accused bears some responsibility to invoke the speedy trial right and put the government on notice that he . . . would prefer to be tried as soon as possible.” Ruffin, 284 Ga. at 62 (2) (b) (iii). And, “[o]ur cases hold that...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de junio de 2023
Leonard v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de Joshua Leonard por un tiroteo en Columbus en 2010, dictaminando que las declaraciones de la víctima identificando a sus agresores, hechas después de despertar de un coma y de nuevo el día en que murió, fueron admitidas correctamente como declaraciones de moribundo.
Reading closing arguments as a whole, we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion when allowing the prosecutor’s reference to scripture, which was permissible rebuttal. Indeed, the prosecutor attempted to defuse Leonard’s argument and offer an explanation as to why Grimes repeatedly identified Leonard and Alexander, resorting to Biblical...
“When an accused claims that a delay in bringing him to trial has worked a denial of his constitutional right to a speedy trial, a court first must consider whether the delay is long enough to raise a presumption of prejudice and to warrant a more searching judicial inquiry into the delay.” State v. Johnson, 291 Ga. 863, 864 (1) (734 SE2d 12) (2012). Here,...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 16 de mayo de 2023
Blalock v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de Dwight Blalock Jr., rechazando sus argumentos de que el juez del juicio debió haber aplazado su juicio y que un testigo comentó indebidamente sobre su silencio.
8 OCGA § 17-8-22 provides in pertinent part: “All applications for continuances are addressed to the sound legal discretion of the court and, if not expressly provided for, shall be granted or refused as the ends of justice may require.” prompt setting of the trial date was its attempt “to comply with the demand for trial” (citations and punctuation...
As noted above, “to be entitled to a new trial based upon the denial of a motion for a continuance, a defendant has the burden to show that he was harmed by that denial.” Phoenix v. State, 304 Ga. 785, 788 (2) (822 SE2d 195) (2018) (citation and punctuation omitted). Here, even if the trial court had abused its discretion in denying the motion for...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 11 de octubre de 2023
Kimbro v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas por asesinato y violación de un hombre del condado de Fulton en un homicidio de 2009 en un motel, resuelto años después mediante una coincidencia de ADN, y rechazó los reclamos sobre la demora del juicio, el alegato final y el desempeño de su abogado.
It is unclear whether Kimbro contends in his brief on appeal that the prosecutor violated certain discovery statutes. See OCGA §§ 17-16-8 (a) (requiring the prosecutor in a felony case to provide to the defense certain information regarding witnesses “not later than ten days before trial” or “as otherwise ordered by the court”) & 17-16-4 (a) (3) (A)...
investigative delay does not deprive him of due process, even if his defense might have been somewhat prejudiced by the lapse of time”).10 To prevail on this claim, Kimbro must “‘prove (1) that the delay caused actual prejudice to his defense, and (2) that the delay was the result of deliberate prosecutorial action to give the State a tactical advantage.’”...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 16 de mayo de 2023
Ward, Comr. v. Medina
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó un fallo según el cual la declaración de culpabilidad de un hombre del condado de Wheeler por robo a mano armada y agresión agravada fue involuntaria, porque le dijeron que enfrentaba mucho más tiempo de prisión del que la ley realmente permitía y se le insinuó que un juicio le iría peor.
The trial court denied Medina’s request, stating that Medina just had an extended conversation with counsel, Medina’s speedy trial demand had imposed constraints on the court, a jury and witnesses were ready and waiting, and the trial court was unwilling to delay proceedings any further. Medina began to say, “I want to ask my attorney —” before the trial...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 18 de enero de 2023
GAY v. JACKSON, JUDGE
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que un conductor que impugnaba restricciones previas al juicio sobre su licencia mediante una petición de habeas corpus actuó de forma prematura, porque su caso de exceso de velocidad seguía pendiente y los recursos judiciales ordinarios seguían disponibles para él.
PINSON, Justice. Donovan Gay received a speeding ticket and pleaded not guilty. While his case was still pending, he filed a pretrial petition for habeas corpus to challenge pretrial restrictions on his driving privileges. The habeas court dismissed the petition, and we now affirm the dismissal. As we recently held in Phillips v. Jackson, 314 Ga. 347 (877...
315 Ga. 464 FINAL COPY S22A1204. GAY v. JACKSON et al.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 5 de julio de 2023
In THE INTEREST OF R. J. A., a Child
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia se negó a revisar un fallo de la Corte de Apelaciones sobre cuándo un menor encarcelado cuenta como 'detenido' para efectos del plazo de acusación formal, pero el magistrado Pinson escribió por separado para cuestionar si los tribunales deberían examinar expedientes antiguos, más allá de las opiniones publicadas, para determinar qué decidió realmente un fallo anterior.
The question presented in this case is whether a superior court or a juvenile court had jurisdiction over the underlying prosecution against R. J. A., a juvenile. A juvenile charged with a crime within the jurisdiction of the superior court “who is detained” is entitled to have the charge presented to the grand jury “within 180 days of the date of...
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.
We recognize that even to the extent the Georgia constitutional provision on jury trials “froze” the scope of the inviolate right to a jury trial as it existed in 1798, it did not freeze the law completely. “New forums may be erected, and new remedies provided, accommodated to the ever shifting state of society.” Flint River, 5 Ga. at 208. In other words,...
B. Nestlehutt’s Analytical Framework In Nestlehutt, this Court applied the well-established analytical framework described above to evaluate a contention that a statutory cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice claims violated Georgia’s constitutional right to trial by jury. See 286 Ga. at 732-738. In that case, we first considered whether in...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 18 de enero de 2023
Hightower v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que un juez del condado de Fulton actuó dentro de su autoridad al declarar un juicio nulo en un juicio por asesinato debido a una emergencia judicial por COVID-19, por lo que la acusada puede ser juzgada de nuevo sin violar las protecciones contra la doble incriminación.
The following week, on March 19, 2020, the trial court entered 4 The Court explained to the jury that [t]he existence of the judicial emergency in Fulton County is related to the continued transmission of the coronavirus, COVID- 19 virus, throughout Fulton County and the potential infection of those who are required to appear in our courts and interact with...
Hightower filed the Plea in Bar over one year later, on April 7, 2021. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the Plea in Bar in a written order entered May 21, 2021. That order recited that in making the decision to declare a mistrial, the trial court was aware that “a judicial emergency [was] being declared due to the...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de febrero de 2023
Gonzales v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas de un hombre por asesinato con delito grave y agresión agravada en la muerte del hijo de tres años de su novia, pero determinó que su condena separada por agresión agravada debió fusionarse con la condena por asesinato.
“Even if an appeal is jurisdictionally defective from the outset, a notice of appeal generally acts as supersedeas until the appeal is dismissed.” Jones v. Peach Trader, 302 Ga. 504, 508 (807 SE2d 840) (2017). However, the filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case from an order that is appealable only under OCGA § 5-6-34 (b) does not act as a supersedeas...
315 Ga. 661 FINAL COPY S22A1303. GONZALES v. THE STATE.
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.
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 · 11 de octubre de 2023
Kinlaw v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato y la cadena perpetua de Harold Dean Kinlaw, rechazando sus impugnaciones a las pruebas de acecho agravado, las instrucciones al jurado, una disputa sobre intérprete y cuestiones de selección del jurado.
motion for new trial. On December 11, 2008, Kinlaw filed a pro se motion for appointment of appellate counsel. New attorneys filed entries of appearance in November 2009 and May 2014, but it does not appear from the record that those attorneys took any action on Kinlaw’s appeal. In November 2019, current appellate counsel, the third post-trial counsel to...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 11 de octubre de 2023
Rivera 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 Ben Hill en un caso sin resolver de 1996, resuelto décadas después mediante pruebas de ADN, pero anuló su condena por violación porque los fiscales nunca le dijeron al gran jurado por qué el cargo de violación no era demasiado antiguo para presentarse.
(1909) (punctuation omitted)). To that end, “[t]his Court has held that an exception to the statute of limitation is a ‘material allegation’ which must be alleged in the indictment.” Id. (quoting McLane v. State, 4 Ga. 335, 342 (2) (1848) (holding that the State is required to allege in the indictment “the particular exception” which the State “intended to...
has made it clear that fundamental principles of due process require indictments or other charging instruments to not only show that a public law of the State has been violated, but also that the defendant has been indicted therefor, in the manner, and within the time, prescribed by the laws of the land. Lynch, 346 Ga. App. at 866 (McMillian, J., concurring...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 18 de enero de 2023
Kelly v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que un juez del condado de Richmond perdió la facultad de reconsiderar su propia orden que concedía un nuevo juicio a Jeremiah Kelly una vez terminado el período judicial, por lo que la orden posterior que negó el nuevo juicio a Kelly no es válida.
6 Although the State admits that “it is a rare case in which these concepts may be said to apply to the State in a criminal prosecution,” it offers no example—not even a “rare” one—of due process applying to the State under such circumstances. The only case that the State cites in support of this idea, Prater v. State, 222 Ga. App. 486, 488 (474 SE2d 684)...
315 Ga. 444 FINAL COPY S22A0979. KELLY v. THE STATE.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 7 de marzo de 2023
Behl v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato criminal de un hombre del condado de Chatham, dictaminando que el juez de primera instancia no se equivocó de forma evidente al omitir una instrucción de homicidio voluntario y que su queja sobre el acceso a las pruebas nunca se planteó correctamente.
The Georgia Constitution provides that “[n]o person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property except by due process of law.” Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. I, Sec. I, Par. I. But a due process claim such 7 Although we do not reach the merits of whether any denial of access to discovery violated Behl’s constitutional rights, we note that some of us are...
Under these circumstances, we conclude that Behl waived any claim of a violation of due process based on any inability to access the materials in question. Cf. Williams v. State, 298 Ga. 538, 542 (7) (783 SE2d 594) (2016) (“We find no support in the record to support appellant’s assertion that the trial court refused to allow him to subpoena witnesses for...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 11 de octubre de 2023
Sosebee 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 y la sentencia de cadena perpetua sin libertad condicional de un hombre por una muerte durante una persecución en automóvil, rechazando sus argumentos de que una regla de indulgencia exigía una sentencia más leve y de que su castigo era inconstitucionalmente cruel.
In this case, the evidence showed that Sosebee willfully put his girlfriend, the motoring public, and other innocent bystanders at risk of grave injury or death simply to avoid a traffic stop. Under the circumstances, we cannot say that Sosebee’s sentence is so overly severe or excessive in proportion to his offenses as to shock the conscience. Sosebee’s...
10 Cf. Bradshaw v. State, 284 Ga. 675, 679 (2) (b), 683 (4) (671 SE2d 485) (2008) (holding that a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment imposed under OCGA § 42-1-12 (n) for the defendant’s second failure to register as a convicted sex offender constituted cruel and unusual punishment, considering that the failure to update information on the sexual...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 16 de mayo de 2023
Moody v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las sentencias de muerte de Jeremy Moody por la violación y el asesinato en 2007 de dos primas adolescentes en el condado de Fulton, rechazando los 13 reclamos que él presentó, incluyendo que su declaración de culpabilidad fue forzada.
After the prosecutor set out the factual basis for the guilty plea, the trial court conducted its own inquiry. Moody affirmed that, “just before [lead defense counsel] was about to get up to deliver the opening statement in th[e guilt/innocence] part of [his] case,” he had indicated that he wanted to speak with counsel and had subsequently spoken “for some...
(a) Guilty Plea Hearing. Moody testified under oath at the plea hearing that he was 35 years old, had completed his G.E.D., and was not then under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or medication.5 The prosecutor listed the charges brought against Moody, and Moody indicated that he understood those charges. Moody also confirmed that he understood that by...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 2 de mayo de 2023
Session v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas de Derrick Session por no registrarse como delincuente sexual con base en una condena de Luisiana, rechazando sus alegatos de que la ley de registro de Georgia violaba sus derechos a viajar, a la igualdad de protección y una protección constitucional estatal contra la legislación sobre el estatus social.
3. Session has not shown that requiring him to register 2 Apparently, the phrase “mend the hold” is a nineteenth-century wrestling term, meaning to get a better grip on one’s opponent. See Harbor Ins. Co. v. Continental Bank Corp., 922 F2d 357, 362 (7th Cir. 1990). violates his federal rights to travel and equal protection. Session raises two federal...
None of the United States Supreme Court decisions on which Session relies for his right-to-travel claim involved an argument that a new state resident’s right to travel is being burdened by a sex offender registration requirement on the basis that, if he had committed the crime in his new state, he would have been treated differently in the underlying...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 7 de febrero de 2023
McCoy v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas por asesinato y allanamiento de morada de un hombre del condado de Fulton, rechazando su argumento de que el testimonio de un experto en huellas dactilares era prueba de referencia y que la evidencia que lo vinculaba al crimen era demasiado débil.
Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdicts, the evidence presented at trial showed that, on December 2, 2003, Barber called 911 at 11:43 a.m. to report that he believed someone was about to break into his apartment. On the 911 recording, Barber stated that two young men were “banging” on doors and trying to break into apartments in his building. He...
Afinar los resultados
Los números cuentan los documentos que encontró esta búsqueda.