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:Opiniones de la Corte Suprema Estatal Quitar filtros
Se encontraron 45 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 · 20 de septiembre de 2022
Williams 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 Richmond, rechazando su alegato de legítima defensa, su argumento sobre la declaración de culpabilidad de un cómplice y su reclamo de que una demora de 25 meses antes de su nuevo juicio violó su derecho a un juicio rápido.
4. Finally, Williams argues that his constitutional right to a speedy trial was violated when he was not brought to retrial for 25 months after remittitur of his case to the superior court following the reversal of his convictions by this Court. The trial court determined that Williams’s constitutional speedy-trial right was not violated and denied both a...
Courts examining an alleged denial of the constitutional right to a speedy trial first must consider whether the interval between the defendant’s arrest, indictment, or other formal accusation and the trial is sufficiently long so as to be characterized as presumptively prejudicial. If the delay is long enough to invoke the presumption of prejudice, the...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 5 de marzo de 2024
Palmer v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas por asesinato de Willie Williams Palmer de su cuarto juicio, rechazando sus reclamos de que se violaron sus derechos a un juicio rápido y que el tribunal de primera instancia excluyó indebidamente pruebas que señalaban a otros posibles sospechosos.
2. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in rejecting his claim that the State violated his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial. We disagree. The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that “[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy . . . trial.” Sixth Amendment speedy trial claims are...
Application of the Barker-Doggett balancing test to particular cases is committed to the sound discretion of the trial courts. See Heard v. State, 295 Ga. 559, 563 (761 SE2d 314) (2014). Thus, on appeal from a ruling on a speedy trial claim, we accept the trial court’s factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous, and we review the trial court’s...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 19 de octubre de 2020
Henderson 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 Gwinnett, rechazando sus reclamos de que se violaron sus derechos a un juicio rápido y que los errores de su abogado le daban derecho a un nuevo juicio. La corte también revocó un precedente anterior que asumía que tales errores del abogado siempre causan daño.
Henderson contends that his constitutional right to a speedy trial was denied. We disagree. The United States Constitution guarantees that, “[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy 3 We remind litigants that the Court will end its practice of considering sufficiency sua sponte in non-death penalty cases with cases...
As we have explained, [i]f the delay is long enough to invoke the presumption of prejudice, the trial court must balance four factors: (1) whether the delay before trial was uncommonly long, (2) whether the government or the criminal defendant is more to blame for the delay, (3) whether, in due course, the defendant asserted his right to a speedy trial, and...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 20 de diciembre de 2022
Davis 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 alegatos de que se violaron sus derechos a un juicio rápido, que se excluyó indebidamente evidencia sobre el amigo de la víctima, y que su abogado fue ineficaz.
2. Davis first contends that he was denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial. In reviewing the trial court’s ruling on this issue, we accept the trial court’s factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous, and we will affirm its ultimate conclusion absent an abuse of discretion. See Burney v. State, 309 Ga. 273, 286 (4) (845 SE2d 625) (2020)....
2 Although this filing may have been intended as a statutory speedy-trial demand, it did not comply with the speedy-trial statute. See OCGA § 17-7-171. That Code section provides that, absent “special permission of the court,” any speedy-trial demand must be filed “at the term of court at which the indictment is found or at the next succeeding regular term...
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 · 6 de febrero de 2024
Redding v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): Por tercera vez, la Corte Suprema de Georgia devolvió el caso de asesinato de Merrick Redding a un tribunal de primera instancia del condado de Muscogee, al fallar que el juez volvió a aplicar mal la prueba legal para decidir si se violaron los derechos de Redding a un juicio rápido.
(c) The assertion of the right to a speedy trial. The trial court weighed the assertion-of-right factor neutrally and did not abuse its discretion in doing so. We have explained that this factor asks whether the defendant asserted the right to a speedy trial in due course. This factor focuses on the timing, form, and vigor of the accused’s demands to be...
Although the trial court again made an erroneous factual finding that Redding requested trial delays, the trial court correctly laid out the other facts and reasons behind the one-year delay in filing the speedy-trial motion and based its analysis in large part on those findings. It is undisputed that Redding first raised the speedy- trial issue one year...
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.
“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,...
(c) Assertion of the right The trial court weighed the third factor heavily against Leonard, finding that Leonard waited more than nineteen months before asserting his right to a speedy trial despite being represented by counsel within one month of his arrest. The record supports that finding, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion by weighing...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 10 de junio de 2025
State v. Embert
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que el juicio por asesinato de 2019 de una mujer del condado de Dougherty no era automáticamente nulo solo porque un jurado resultó ser un delincuente convicto inelegible, revirtiendo la decisión del tribunal de primera instancia de desestimar su caso por motivos de juicio rápido.
state or before the federal government?” The record contains no indication that either the Juror or any other prospective juror raised a hand in response, and the trial judge determined that the panel was “legally qualified.” (a) Order on Motion for New Trial: Following the motion hearing, the trial court granted Embert’s amended motion for new trial on...
In its dismissal order, the trial court first determined that the service of an ineligible juror not only rendered her sentence void, entitling her to a new trial, but also rendered the December 2019 trial void, finding that “there was no jury trial in this case that satisfied Embert’s constitutional right to a speedy trial.” Therefore, the trial court...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 29 de junio de 2020
Burney v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena de Terrence Burney por asesinato con malicia en la muerte de un hombre de 76 años del condado de Jones, rechazando reclamos sobre instrucciones al jurado, un juicio retrasado y una jurado que buscó términos legales en internet.
Moreover, Burney merely speculates as to how the medical records would have aided him, and he offers no evidence that anything contained in the medical records might have differed from the testimony about those records or Kitchens’ medical history that was presented at trial. As we have recently discussed, [t]he mere possibility that an item of undisclosed...
On appeal, Burney argues that the delays in the case prejudiced him because his lengthy incarceration caused him to suffer from heightened anxiety and because the State used the period between his arrest in October 2008 and September 2011 to build a case against him by interviewing his cellmates and executing a plan to elicit incriminating statements from...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 1 de julio de 2025
Kitchens v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia devolvió el caso de asesinato de un hombre del condado de Bibb al tribunal de primera instancia tras determinar que el juez calculó mal hechos clave y aplicó mal la ley al rechazar su reclamo de que el estado violó su derecho a un juicio rápido.
(c) Assertion of the Right In considering the assertion-of-the-right factor, a trial court must evaluate whether the defendant “‘has asserted the right to a speedy trial in due course,’” which requires “‘a close examination of the procedural history of the case with particular attention to the timing, form, and vigor of the accused’s demands to be tried...
The court correctly determined that Kitchens’s private letters to his lawyer failed to put the trial court or the State on notice of an assertion of his right to a speedy trial and that, consequently, those “[p]rivileged, off-the-record conversations” did not serve as a sufficient invocation of the right. Henderson, 310 Ga. at 237. But the trial court’s...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 13 de agosto de 2024
Johnson v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas por asesinato de un hombre del condado de Chatham, al resolver que un plazo de la ley estatal sobre juicio rápido no anula ni bloquea un reclamo separado bajo el derecho federal a un juicio rápido de la Sexta Enmienda.
2 Johnson does not challenge the trial court’s conclusion that the statu- tory demand was untimely. conflicts with the Sixth Amendment’s right to a speedy trial, and so the trial court should have considered whether his Sixth Amend- ment speedy trial right was violated instead of dismissing his stat- utory demand.
Johnson’s claim fails. The demand statute is “in aid and imple- mentation of the State constitutional right to a speedy trial.” State v. Varner, 277 Ga. 433, 434 (589 SE2d 111) (2003) (cleaned up) (em- phasis added). That statute “provides no assistance in relation to the federal constitutional right to a speedy trial.” Henry v. State, 263 Ga. 417, 418 (434...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 1 de octubre de 2024
Redding v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó por cuarta y última vez la condena de Merrick Redding por asesinato en grado de delito grave, al determinar que no se violaron sus derechos a un juicio rápido y que cualquier error probatorio en el juicio fue inofensivo.
LAGRUA, Justice. Following a 2018 jury trial, Appellant Merrick Redding was found guilty of felony murder and aggravated assault in connection with the death of Joseph Davis. This is Redding’s fourth appeal to this Court. In his first three appeals, we vacated the trial court’s judgment and remanded for the trial court to apply the correct facts and legal...
Redding for malice murder, felony murder, and aggravated assault with a “closed fist.” He was reindicted on the same charges on May 22, 2018. At a trial from October 24 to November 5, 2018, the jury found Redding not guilty of malice murder but guilty of the remaining counts. The trial court orally denied the speedy-trial motion at the pretrial conference...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 3 de febrero de 2026
Jenkins v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia desestimó la apelación directa de un hombre contra la denegación de su solicitud de juicio rápido conforme a la ley, y resolvió que debía haber usado el procedimiento de apelación interlocutoria y que la corte carecía de jurisdicción para conocer el caso tal como fue presentado.
In Hubbard v. State, 254 Ga. 694 (1985), we held that when a defendant files a speedy trial demand under OCGA § 17-7-170, which governs speedy trial demands in noncapital cases, and later moves to dismiss the indictment against him under that statute, he may appeal directly from the denial of such motion without following the interlocutory appellate...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 19 de octubre de 2020
Goins v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó por segunda vez la condena por asesinato de un hombre del condado de Gwinnett, al rechazar su renovado reclamo de juicio rápido y no encontrar error reversible en el manejo de la evidencia y una solicitud de juicio nulo por parte del tribunal de primera instancia.
2. Appellant contends that his constitutional right to a speedy trial was violated. That claim, which Appellant raised in a pretrial motion to dismiss his indictment and again in his amended motion for new trial, requires the trial court to make findings of fact and conclusions of law under the two-part framework set forth in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 5 de marzo de 2024
McCullum v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas de Samuel Earl McCullum por la violación y el asesinato en 1998 de Monica Blackwell y la violación de otra mujer en 1999, rechazando sus argumentos de que la evidencia era insuficiente y que la demora previa al juicio y la acumulación de cargos violaron sus derechos.
4. The Speedy Trial Motion McCullum contends that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion to dismiss Count 5 (rape of C. C.) on constitu- tional speedy trial grounds.10 McCullum was initially indicted for C. C.’s rape in 2007. In 2011, he filed a motion to dismiss the indictment for violations of his right to a speedy trial under the...
If a court concludes the delay is presumptively prejudicial, as the trial court correctly did here, it must then apply a balancing test that considers the length and reasons for the delay, the defendant’s assertion of his speedy-trial right, and the prejudice to the defend- ant. See Johnson v. State, 300 Ga. 252, 257 (3) (794 SE2d 60) (2016). These factors...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 6 de mayo de 2025
Nelson v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia anuló un fallo que negaba la moción de un acusado de asesinato del condado de Fulton para desestimar su acusación por motivos de juicio rápido, al encontrar que el tribunal de primera instancia cometió errores de hecho y aplicó mal la ley al ponderar la demora.
On July 10, 2023, Appellant filed a motion for permission to file an out-of-time statutory demand for speedy trial under OCGA § 17- 7-171 (a). In the motion, Appellant also said that he was making a demand for a speedy trial “[p]ursuant to the Georgia Constitution.” The trial court held a hearing on the motion on August 31, 2023. During the hearing, the...
On October 24, 2023, three years and four months after Appellant’s arrest, Appellant moved to dismiss his indictment on constitutional speedy-trial grounds, invoking his right to a speedy trial under both the United States Constitution and the Georgia Constitution. The court scheduled a virtual hearing on the motion to dismiss for June 18, 2024, but...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 17 de mayo de 2022
Redding v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia devolvió por segunda vez un caso de asesinato del condado de Muscogee al tribunal de primera instancia, al determinar que el juez aplicó mal la ley y no ponderó correctamente los factores usados para decidir reclamos de juicio rápido.
1. As we explained in Redding I, [t]he record shows that [Appellant] was arrested on September 12, 2016, one week after the [murder]. [Appellant] was granted a bond on March 2, 2017, but he 1 See Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 530 (92 SCt 2182, 33 LE2d 101) (1972). See also Doggett v. United States, 505 U.S. 647, 652 (112 SCt 2686, 120 LE2d 520) (1992). 2...
apparently was unable to post the bond amount and so remained in jail. On September 28, 2017, [Appellant] filed a “Motion to Dismiss Charge Based on Violation of Constitutional Right to Speedy Trial.” At that point, [Appellant] had not yet been indicted, and he noted in his motion that he had repeatedly asked for his case to be presented to a grand jury and...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 16 de junio de 2026
Price v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia anuló parte del fallo contra un hombre del condado de Fulton condenado por asesinato, al encontrar que el juez de primera instancia cometió errores legales al rechazar su reclamo de que se le negó un juicio rápido, y devolvió el caso para un análisis adecuado.
2 OCGA § 17-7-171(a) provides: Any person accused of a capital offense may enter a demand for speedy trial at the term of court at which the indictment is found or at the next succeeding regular term thereafter; or, by special permission of the court, the defendant may at any sub- sequent term thereafter demand a speedy trial. The demand for speedy trial...
If the trial court significantly misapplies the law or clearly errs in a material factual finding, we will af- firm the trial court’s exercise of discretion only if we can conclude that, had the trial court used the cor- rect facts and legal analysis, it would have had no discretion to reach a different judgment. But if the trial court would still have...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 16 de junio de 2020
Redding v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia determinó que un juez del condado de Muscogee nunca analizó adecuadamente si a un hombre condenado por un puñetazo fatal en una barbacoa se le negó su derecho a un juicio rápido, así que devolvió el caso para una decisión adecuada.
3. Redding contends that the trial court erred when it failed to dismiss the indictment on the ground that his constitutional right to a speedy trial was violated. The record shows that Redding was arrested on September 12, 2016, one week after the incident. Redding was granted a bond on March 2, 2017, but he apparently was unable to post the bond amount...
I overrule the motion on [the speedy trial] because of the violation of probation. The toxicology reports and other documents, police reports they had to accumulate in order to take the case to the grand jury for the charge of murder . . . . The trial court did not enter a written order. A constitutional speedy trial claim is evaluated under a two- part...
Afinar los resultados
Los números cuentan los documentos que encontró esta búsqueda.