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 Quitar filtros
Se encontraron 131 documentos.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 14 de mayo de 2020
BARROW v. RAFFENSPERGER (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que el secretario de Estado Brad Raffensperger canceló correctamente la elección de 2020 para el puesto del magistrado Keith Blackwell, porque la renuncia aceptada de Blackwell garantiza una vacante que eliminará el período para el cual los votantes elegirían a alguien.
(b) Beskin’s case is not moot. At the hearing held by the trial court, the Secretary argued that Beskin’s claims were moot because she had qualified as a candidate in the May 19 election for Justice Bethel’s office and thus had availed herself of an adequate alternative remedy to the mandamus relief that she was requesting. In response, Beskin asserted that...
In Beskin’s case, however, we need not decide whether her qualifying for the election for Justice Bethel’s office constituted an adequate alternative remedy to her qualifying for the election for Justice Blackwell’s office, or whether having qualified for the election for Justice Bethel’s office, OCGA § 21-2-136 would preclude her from withdrawing her...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 19 de mayo de 2026
In the Matter of Charles M. Dalziel, Jr
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia ordenó una suspensión de seis meses para el abogado Charles M. Dalziel Jr. por revelar información confidencial de un cliente y presentar una demanda infundada contra un bufete de abogados para intentar cobrar sus honorarios.
(d) Recommended Discipline The Special Master then determined that because the max- imum sanction for a Rule 3.1 violation is a public reprimand, the focus of his disciplinary recommendation was Dalziel’s violation of Rule 1.6(a), and concluded that Dalziel should be suspended for no less than six months. In reaching this conclusion, the Special Master...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 30 de junio de 2022
McIver v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia revocó la condena por asesinato en la muerte a tiros de la esposa de Tex McIver, dictaminando que el juez de primera instancia debió permitir que el jurado considerara un cargo menor de homicidio involuntario como delito menor.
A review of selected cases on involuntary manslaughter provides some guidance for determining whether there is slight evidence of the commission of a lawful act in an unlawful manner to support an instruction on OCGA § 16-5-3 (b). For example, if the uncontradicted evidence shows that the defendant was not in lawful possession of the weapon that caused the...
of recklessness in their analysis of unlawful manner involuntary manslaughter. For example, in Drake v. State, 221 Ga. 347 (144 SE2d 519) (1965), the appellant shot and killed the victim in the woods of north Georgia. The appellant told the investigating officers that he was deer hunting but shot at what he thought was a fox in the mist or fog. While the...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 6 de abril de 2020
Srm Group, Inc. v. Travelers Property Casualty Company of America
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia resolvió que una empresa demandada en un tribunal puede solicitar honorarios de abogado por litigio de mala fe incluso cuando su contrademanda era obligatoria por ley, no solo cuando era opcional.
1. Background. The facts, as set forth by the Court of Appeals, are as follows: Travelers Property Casualty Company of America (“Travelers”) filed suit against SRM Group, Inc. (“SRM”), seeking to recover unpaid premiums due under a workers’ compensation insurance policy. In response, SRM asserted counterclaims against Travelers for breach of contract,...
4. With Byers set aside, and given our determination in Division 2, it is clear that SRM was entitled to seek attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11, as it asserted independent claims for breach 6 We also disapprove of Maree v. ROMAR Joint Venture, 329 Ga. App. 282, 297 (6) (d) n.18 (763 SE2d 899) (2014); and Murtagh v. Emory Univ., 321 Ga. App. 411, 417 (3)...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 20 de septiembre de 2022
Jones v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de un hombre por un tiroteo fatal en 2015 en Augusta, dictaminando que un casquillo de escopeta hallado en su patio trasero fue incautado legalmente mientras oficiales ejecutaban una orden de arresto válida.
Nevertheless, the undisputed evidence also demonstrates that, at the time the officers went to execute the arrest warrant, they did not have a search warrant for Appellant’s residence. “The Fourth Amendment [to the United States Constitution] proscribes all unreasonable searches and seizures, and searches conducted without prior judicial approval are per se...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 30 de junio de 2022
In the Matter of Daniel Kirkland McCall
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia rechazó la propuesta de suspensión de seis meses de un abogado por descuidar a tres clientes, dictaminando que sus alegatos atenuantes, un reembolso no pagado y las condiciones de reincorporación propuestas no respaldaban aceptar el acuerdo tal como se ofrecía.
McCall states that while he recognizes the seriousness of this matter and takes full responsibility for his actions and inactions, he believes that a six-month suspension, nunc pro tunc to May 13, 2019, is appropriate here where all of the conduct in the Bar complaints occurred during the time in which he was in the midst of a psychotic episode and was...
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 · 11 de junio de 2024
Hill v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato con malicia de un hombre del condado de Newton por estrangular a su novia, rechazando sus impugnaciones a las pruebas, el manejo por el tribunal de primera instancia de las mociones de nulidad del juicio y la selección del jurado, y el desempeño de su abogado.
(b) On appeal, Hill argues that the trial court abused its discretion in denying each motion for mistrial, contending that each piece of testimony discussed above, individually and when viewed collectively, deprived him of a fair trial. “Whether to grant a motion for mistrial is within the trial court’s sound discretion, and the trial court’s exercise of...
9 Although, as noted above, trial counsel did not move to strike six of the jurors about which Hill complains in Division 4, Hill argues only that counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to move to strike five of those jurors; he does not include one of the jurors in this ineffective-assistance claim. so patently unreasonable that no competent...
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.
5 See Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. I, Sec. I, Par. VIII (“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but the General Assembly shall have power to prescribe the manner in which arms may be borne.”); Ga. L. 1994, p. 1012, § 4 (adding public or private technical schools, vocational schools, colleges, universities, and other institutions...
10 In pertinent part, OCGA § 16-11-127.1 (c) (2017) as amended provided: The provisions of this Code section [making it unlawful for any person to carry or possess any weapon while within a school safety zone, at a school function, or on a bus or other transportation furnished by a school] shall not apply to: ... (20) (A) Any weapons carry license holder...
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 · 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)...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 5 de octubre de 2020
Premier Health Care Investments, LLC v. Uhs of Anchor, L.P
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que una agencia estatal de salud excedió su autoridad al exigir a un hospital obtener un nuevo permiso antes de reasignar camas existentes a un programa psiquiátrico, porque la ley estatal no incluye la reasignación de camas entre lo que requiere esa aprobación.
23 Indeed, the Department itself now disclaims such a reading of the Psychiatric Rule. See footnote 4, above. the Department under OCGA § 31-6-21 in this context that we should avoid such an interpretation. And although we conclude that the canon of constitutional doubt therefore weighs in favor of interpreting OCGA § 31-6-40 (a) narrowly, we also emphasize...
(b) Relevant regulations. The statutory framework that sets forth the CON program is not the only text relevant to our inquiry. Indeed, “to administer the certificate of need program[,]” the Department is authorized to “adopt, promulgate, and implement rules and regulations sufficient to administer the . . . certificate of need program[,]” to “establish, by...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 6 de septiembre de 2023
MOTORSPORTS OF CONYERS, LLC v. BURBACH
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia resolvió que, antes de que un tribunal pueda aplicar la ley de otro estado elegida en un contrato para decidir si una cláusula de no competencia es exigible, primero debe verificar si esa cláusula es razonable conforme a la propia ley de Georgia sobre pactos restrictivos.
We granted review to clarify the framework for deciding whether to apply contracting parties’ choice of foreign law to govern the enforceability of a restrictive covenant in an employment contract. 2. (a) As a general rule, when parties agree to have foreign law govern their contractual relations, Georgia courts must honor that choice and apply the foreign...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 29 de junio de 2020
Raines v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia resolvió que un juez, no un jurado, puede decidir si una persona que cometió un asesinato siendo adolescente es tan 'irremediablemente corrupta' que puede recibir cadena perpetua sin libertad condicional.
To that end, it is undisputed that in interpreting the Eighth Amendment, the United States Supreme Court has held that a sentence of death cannot be imposed on a juvenile. Roper, 543 U.S. at 578. And although it has not held that a sentence of life without parole is barred categorically for juvenile offenders, it has, through Miller, “rendered life without...
In other words, although the Supreme Court’s Eighth Amendment precedents impose separate constitutional restrictions on the types of punishment that may be imposed on a juvenile, they do not answer whether OCGA § 16-5-1 (e) (1) satisfies the Sixth Amendment. Indeed, they do not speak to what punishment a state statute authorizes for a given offense or...
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.
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...
amending the act. See City of Atlanta v. Gower, 216 Ga. 368, 372 (116 SE2d 738) (1960).29 Under Georgia law, a void legislative act retroactive legislation is that a constitutional amendment can authorize a specific exception such that a legislative act that was unconstitutional when passed can be revived and made effective. See Sherman v. Atlanta...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 15 de octubre de 2024
Espinosa v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la denegación de la solicitud de un hombre para retirar su declaración de culpabilidad por apuñalar hasta la muerte al hijo de 15 años de su novia, rechazando su alegato de que su abogado debió haberle informado sobre una posible defensa de enajenación mental.
At the hearing, plea counsel testified that he had practiced in Georgia since 2007. He had worked both as a public defender and in private practice as a criminal defense attorney and had handled thousands of felony cases. Counsel explained the way he typically handled a murder case, i.e., meeting with the client, requesting discovery, taking discovery to...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 28 de enero de 2025
WHITE v. CITY OF MABLETON
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la ley estatal que creó la Ciudad de Mableton, dictaminando que incluir distritos de mejoramiento comunitario en la misma ley no violó la regla de Georgia contra combinar temas no relacionados en una sola ley.
MCMILLIAN, Justice. In 2022, the Georgia General Assembly enacted House Bill 839 (2022) (“HB 839”), which provides a charter for and incorporates the City of Mableton within unincorporated Cobb County. Deidre White, Ronnie Blue, Judy King, Tanya Leake, and Robert Swarthout are citizens of Cobb County who reside within the limits of Mableton (“Appellants”)....
Thus, the relevant question here is whether HB 839’s CID provision is a “subject matter” that is germane to HB 839’s overall objective of incorporating Mableton or whether it is so “dissimilar and discordant” that the creation of CIDs has no “logical connection with or relation to” the incorporation of Mableton. Wall, 242 Ga. at 570 (3) (citation and...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 4 de marzo de 2025
Dillard v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas por asesinato y robo a mano armada de un hombre que disparó y mató a un joven de 15 años durante una venta de marihuana fingida, rechazando sus argumentos de que la evidencia en el juicio era demasiado débil.
Appellant contends that Idris was his accomplice in a drug transaction, pointing to evidence that Gerena and Idris agreed to sell Appellant marijuana and that Idris accompanied Gerena to the convenience store to complete the sale. But even if Idris (the seller) could be considered to be an accomplice to Appellant (the buyer) in a drug crime — which we doubt...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 17 de septiembre de 2024
Gallegos-Munoz v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia aclaró que una regla de 1989 que exigía a los jueces determinar primero que acusaciones previas de abuso sexual eran 'probablemente falsas' antes de permitir que el jurado las conociera ya no aplica bajo el Código de Pruebas de 2013 del estado.
(a) Our holdings in Smith. “The main issue on appeal” in Smith was “whether [former] OCGA § 24-2-3, commonly referred to as [Georgia’s] rape-shield law, bar[red] admission of testimony regarding the victim’s alleged past false accusations against persons other than the defendant.” Smith, 259 Ga. at 135-136. We held that the rape-shield statute, which is now...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 6 de mayo de 2025
Johnson v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena de Alex Lee Johnson por asesinato en la comisión de un delito grave, dictaminando que la evidencia de su pertenencia a una pandilla fue admitida correctamente para mostrar el motivo y que cualquier error al omitir instrucciones sobre delitos menores fue inofensivo.
The same goes for the armed robbery. That offense has a different element — “use of an offensive weapon” — compared to robbery by intimidation. Compare OCGA § 16-8-41 (a), with OCGA § 16-8-40 (a) (2). The “‘use of an offensive weapon’ takes place when the weapon is used to commit a violent injury to the person of the victim or to place the victim in...
Afinar los resultados
Los números cuentan los documentos que encontró esta búsqueda.