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 2021 Quitar filtros
Se encontraron 74 documentos.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 1 de marzo de 2021
In the Matter of Willie George Davis, Jr
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia rechazó una suspensión propuesta de 18 meses para un abogado que manejó mal el patrimonio de su hermana y el dinero de su sobrino huérfano, al considerar que el castigo era demasiado débil dado cuánto tiempo podría mantenerlo efectivamente en el limbo.
Among other things, the Special Master concluded that Davis did not maintain and had not provided any records of how much of his nephew’s funds he spent for the benefit of his nephew, such that the record showed only that the money was unaccounted for, not necessarily that Davis converted it and used it for his own purposes; and that, indeed, the State Bar...
3. Special Master’s Recommendation of Discipline. (a) Aggravating and mitigating factors. The Special Master looked to the ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions for guidance in determining the appropriate punishment for Davis’s misconduct, see In the Matter of Morse, 266 Ga. 652, 653 (470 SE2d 232) (1996), and found that Davis correctly noted in his...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 2 de noviembre de 2021
George v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que la policía no puede incautar objetos fuera del alcance de una orden de registro solo porque sean 'relevantes', sino que debe cumplir con la doctrina más estricta de la vista simple antes de tomar dicha evidencia.
In effect, the Court of Appeals concluded that the State need only show that evidence was “relevant” or “related” to the matter under investigation to justify the seizure of evidence outside the scope of a search warrant. But that conclusion was erroneous, as was the holding in Walsh, because the seizure of such evidence not subject to any other exception...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de junio de 2021
Moon v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia revocó las condenas por asesinato de un hombre del condado de Chatham porque la jueza de primera instancia removió indebidamente a una jurado disidente durante las deliberaciones sin una base legal sólida para hacerlo.
To convict Moon of malice murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon during the commission of a crime, the State was not required to prove that Moon personally fired the shots that killed Pickels and Biancosino, only that he was a party to the crimes, which, in this case, meant that he intentionally aided or abetted in the commission of the...
(ii) Motive. To properly show motive, “the extrinsic evidence must be logically relevant and necessary to prove something other than the accused’s propensity to commit the crime charged.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Strong, 309 Ga. at 312 (2) (d) (2). The State argued that the evidence of Moon’s other violent acts was relevant to show that he...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 15 de marzo de 2021
Moss v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de un adolescente del condado de Houston y su sentencia de cadena perpetua sin libertad condicional, al rechazar los reclamos de asistencia letrada inefectiva y determinar que el juez de primera instancia estableció correctamente que los delitos reflejaban una incorregibilidad permanente.
Moss’s crimes reflected irreparable corruption or permanent incorrigibility before entry of Moss’s original LWOP sentence. After Moss’s amended motion for new trial was filed, Moss and the State agreed that Moss was entitled to a new sentencing hearing for the trial court to make such a determination before Moss could be sentenced to LWOP for crimes...
(b) Moss also contends that his trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to demur to the aggravated battery count of the indictment, as well as the felony murder and firearm counts that were predicated on aggravated battery. Under OCGA § 16-5-24 (a): A person commits the offense of aggravated battery when he or she maliciously causes...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 10 de agosto de 2021
Alston & Bird, LLP v. Hatcher Management Holdings, LLC
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia resolvió que la ley de reparto de culpa de Georgia permite a los jurados reducir los daños según la culpa de un tercero que no es parte solo cuando una demanda nombra a más de un demandado, y también resolvió que los reembolsos de gastos de litigio por mala fe pueden dividirse según la culpa.
Colorado’s apportionment statute is similar to ours, so we have previously looked to it for guidance in interpreting our apportionment statute. See, e.g., Atlanta Women’s Specialists, LLC owner” in the singular, the record in the case reveals that the suit was brought against two entities (Red Roof Inns, Inc. and R Roof V LLC). v. Trabue, 310 Ga. 331, 341...
Finally, A&B and amici argue that allowing apportionment of damages according to the percentage of fault allocated to nonparties in multiple-defendant cases but not in single-defendant cases would be arbitrary and not reflective of the General Assembly’s intent. But “[t]he best indicator of the General Assembly’s intent is the statutory text it actually...
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.
PROSECUTOR: He told law enforcement that he did what he told the victim he was going to do when he said: I done what I told him. Would that be consistent or inconsistent with someone experiencing PTSD symptoms? DR. GAY: I would say that would be inconsistent. And that kind of goes back to premeditation and intent. Assuming without deciding that Dr. Gay...
313 Ga. 57 FINAL COPY S21A1188. BATES v. THE STATE.
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.
When construing a statute, “we must presume that the General Assembly meant what it said and said what it meant.” Deal v. Coleman, 294 Ga. 170, 172 (1) (a) (751 SE2d 337) (2013) (citation and punctuation omitted). Accordingly, we “afford the statutory text its plain and ordinary meaning,” “view[ing] the statutory text in the context in which it appears,”...
shall issue such applicant a license or renewal license to carry any weapon unless facts establishing ineligibility have been reported or unless the judge determines such applicant has not met all the qualifications, is not of good moral character, or has failed to comply with any of the requirements contained in this Code section. . . . Id. (emphasis...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 1 de junio de 2021
Holmes v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de Dequan Holmes y su sentencia de cadena perpetua sin libertad condicional por un homicidio que cometió apenas días antes de cumplir 18 años, rechazando su alegato de legítima defensa y su impugnación bajo la Octava Enmienda.
The 2013 sentencing hearing was held after the United States Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (132 SCt 2455, 183 LE2d 407) (2012). The trial judge did not explicitly mention Holmes’s age or discuss the characteristics of youth during sentencing. In his order denying Holmes’s motion for new trial, however, the judge stated...
311 Ga. 698 FINAL COPY S21A0377. HOLMES v. THE STATE.
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.
At common law[,] infancy is usually regarded as being divided into three distinct periods as to which distinct presumption for capacity or incapacity prevails. An infant under the age of seven (in Georgia changed by statute to ten years) is presumed to have no capacity to commit a crime, and such presumption is conclusive and unrebuttable. After fourteen...
10 Wilson argues that he would have been 12 years old for almost eight months of 1986, when the molestation of P. W. was alleged to have occurred in the State’s notice, and 13 years old for the last four months of 1986. Wilson was 13 years old or older when the prior offenses occurred, this argument fails. To the extent that Wilson was under the age of 13...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 24 de junio de 2021
Young v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por homicidio y la sentencia de muerte de Rodney Young, y rechazó su alegato de que la exigencia de Georgia de probar la discapacidad intelectual más allá de toda duda razonable es inconstitucional.
Since the death penalty for juveniles was outlawed by the 5-4 decision in Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 578 (125 SCt 1183, 161 LE2d 1) (2005), the clear trend line of the United States Supreme Court’s cases in this area (all decided by narrow margins) was to restrict the states’ authority to punish juveniles. In particular, the reasoning of the Court’s...
(ii) We turn now to the procedural issue that Young raises regarding the constitutionality of Georgia’s standard of proof. On this question, we begin and end with the Supreme Court’s statement in Atkins that it “‘l[eft] to the State(s) the task of developing appropriate ways to enforce the [federal] constitutional restriction’” on executing intellectually...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 24 de agosto de 2021
In the Matter of Carl S. Von Mehren
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia aceptó la petición de disciplina voluntaria de un abogado del área de Statesboro y lo suspendió por seis meses después de que admitiera haber manejado indebidamente fondos fiduciarios de clientes y no haber protegido la defensa legal de un cliente.
In his petition for voluntary discipline, Von Mehren asserted that he initially believed the man had a viable legal argument based on the man’s staunch belief that his outbuilding was located entirely on his own property. However, after learning that the results of a survey showed the man’s outbuilding to be located mostly or entirely on the property owned...
Having found violations of Rules 1.3, 1.15 (I) (a), and 1.16, the Special Master turned her attention to the appropriate level of discipline, noting that the maximum penalty for a single violation of Rules 1.3 and 1.15 (I) (a) is disbarment, and the maximum penalty for a violation of Rule 1.16 is a public reprimand. The Special Master correctly recited that...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 7 de julio de 2021
In the Matter of Joel S. Wadsworth
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia inhabilitó al abogado Joel S. Wadsworth después de que abandonara a varios clientes en una demanda del condado de Fulton, al no responder a mociones judiciales ni comunicarse con ellos mientras seguía ejerciendo tras quedar inelegible por no pagar las cuotas del colegio de abogados.
Wadsworth “did not withdraw from representation after he became ineligible to practice law on September 1, 2017,” and that “[t]o date, [Wadsworth] is ineligible to practice law for failure to pay his State Bar of Georgia dues.” The special master’s recommendation likewise included findings that Wadsworth “remained counsel of record for plaintiffs . . ....
312 Ga. 159 FINAL COPY S21Y1016. IN THE MATTER OF JOEL S. WADSWORTH.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 15 de marzo de 2021
McGarity 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 Paulding, pero anuló sus condenas en dos cargos menores tras determinar que el tribunal de primera instancia permitió indebidamente que un capitán de policía repitiera declaraciones anteriores de testigos para reforzar su credibilidad.
OCGA § 24-6-613 (c), enacted as part of the overhaul of our rules of evidence that took effect on January 1, 2013, see Ga. L. 2011, p. 99, § 2, represents Georgia’s first codification of a rule on the admissibility of prior consistent statements. See Walters v. State, 335 Ga. App. 12, 13 (780 SE2d 720) (2015). Prior to the adoption of OCGA § 24-6-613 (c),...
violation by not producing the document and had also violated its statutory duty to “reduce anything that [Harlow] did in this case to writing.”10 The prosecutor responded that this document was merely an “internal computer printout” related to the chain of custody; that he believed all documents had been provided to the defense; and that the “remedy” would...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 24 de agosto de 2021
State v. Gilmore
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que un video mudo que muestra a un informante confidencial comprando drogas a un hombre puede usarse como prueba, porque las acciones del informante frente a la cámara no fueron una declaración intencional cubierta por la Cláusula de Confrontación.
2. Analysis. (a) Standard of Review. . We ordinarily review the trial court’s grant of a motion in limine for abuse of discretion. See State v. Stephens, 307 Ga. 615, 616 (837 SE2d 830) (2020). And when confronted with a mixed question of law and fact, “we accept the trial court’s findings on disputed facts and witness credibility unless they are clearly...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 14 de diciembre de 2021
Hines v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de un hombre, rechazando su argumento de que el juez de primera instancia no debió permitir que un testigo de último momento declarara en su contra.
At trial, Johnson testified that she spent two days in Gaines’s apartment braiding Gaines’s and Hines’s hair, working on Gaines’s hair one day and on Hines’s hair the next. Johnson said that her work was interrupted because Hines and Gaines “were arguing back-and-forth repeatedly.” Johnson further recalled Hines saying: “I don’t even like black girls,...
4 OCGA § 17-16-6 provides in relevant part: If at any time during the course of the proceedings it is brought to the attention of the court that the state has failed to comply with the requirements of this article, the court may order the state to permit the discovery or inspection, interview of the witness, grant a continuance, or, upon a showing of...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 1 de marzo de 2021
In the Matter of L. Nicole Brantley
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia rechazó la solicitud de una abogada de recibir solo una amonestación por no reembolsar honorarios a un cliente, al determinar que su historial disciplinario y su falta de sinceridad exigían una sanción más severa que se decidirá tras una audiencia completa.
2 On July 22, 2020, this Court entered an order appointing Marlin as Special Master; the order also vacated the 2016 order that had appointed a prior Special Master. Marlin issued his report on September 20, 2020. His thorough and helpful report reflects that Brantley submitted her proof of final payment to the State Bar in July 2017. The record does not...
In its complaint, the State Bar recited the following chronology. After being retained in October 2013, Brantley was discharged by the client, who was dissatisfied with Brantley’s lack of communication and failure to follow his instructions in handling his case. Brantley, however, never submitted a written request to withdraw, in violation of Uniform...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 5 de abril de 2021
In the Matter of Jason Lee Van Dyke
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia rechazó la solicitud de un abogado de Texas de poner fin a su suspensión para ejercer la abogacía en Georgia, señalando que quedan demasiadas preguntas sin responder sobre su conducta y otras medidas disciplinarias que enfrentó en otros lugares.
5 Van Dyke has also apparently been suspended with similar conditions by federal district courts in both the Northern and Eastern Districts of Texas. 6 Although Van Dyke submitted copies of the various suspension orders, he has not provided documentation showing that the Texas Bar has reinstated him. As referenced above, Van Dyke has recently submitted a...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 5 de octubre de 2021
Emmons, Warden v. Bryant
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia revocó una orden de un tribunal de habeas corpus que había concedido un nuevo juicio a un hombre condenado por agresión sexual agravada, al determinar que su abogado de apelación no brindó una representación constitucionalmente inadecuada.
As to the first of these issues, Haddad did assert an ineffectiveness claim based on Wyatt’s failure to object to the witnesses’ testimony about the text messages. The Court of Appeals rejected this claim, concluding that, pretermitting whether Wyatt performed deficiently by failing to object on best-evidence grounds, there had been no showing of prejudice...
LAGRUA, Justice. This appeal arises from the grant of a petition for habeas corpus filed by Steven Bryant in connection with his 2015 conviction for aggravated sexual battery. In granting Bryant’s petition, the habeas court ruled that Bryant’s appellate counsel had rendered ineffective assistance by failing to properly assert several instances of trial...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de septiembre de 2021
Cooper Tire & Rubber Company v. McCall
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que Cooper Tire, una empresa de Delaware que hace negocios en Georgia, puede ser demandada aquí por un accidente automovilístico en Florida simplemente porque se registró para hacer negocios en el estado, reafirmando un precedente de casi 30 años.
312 Ga. 422 FINAL COPY S20G1368. COOPER TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY v. McCALL.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 15 de febrero de 2021
POLO GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. v. CUNARD
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó una ordenanza del condado de Forsyth que exige a las asociaciones de propietarios mantener los sistemas de aguas pluviales, y rechazó los argumentos de una asociación de que la norma obliga a una intrusión ilegal, impone servidumbre involuntaria o excede la autoridad del condado.
requires the HOA to perform work on property owned by an individual lot owner, as opposed to property owned by the HOA. It thus argues that compelled labor on another’s property constitutes involuntary servitude. We have no trouble concluding that the HOA has not established a Thirteenth Amendment violation here. That is because the record belies the HOA’s...
14 We emphasize that we resolve the HOA’s as-applied challenges based on the record on appeal in this case, and in large part on the text of the various covenants and other agreements set forth in Polo Golf’s Declaration. We express no opinion about how similar as-applied challenges would fare under a different set of contractual agreements. 15 In Anderson,...
Afinar los resultados
Los números cuentan los documentos que encontró esta búsqueda.