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 2025 Quitar filtros
Se encontraron 66 documentos.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 24 de junio de 2025
Hart v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato con malicia de una madre del condado de Clayton por la muerte a golpes de su hija de cuatro años, rechazando alegatos de pruebas insuficientes, defensa ineficaz y error del tribunal de primera instancia, y también rechazó la solicitud del estado de enviar las futuras apelaciones de asesinato sin pena de muerte a la Corte de Apelaciones.
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to modification resulting from motions for reconsideration under Supreme Court Rule 27, the Court’s reconsideration, and editorial revisions by the Reporter of Decisions. The version of the opinion published in the Advance Sheets for the Georgia Reports, designated as the “Final Copy,” will replace any prior version on the...
conclude that Thornton correctly held that a murder case in which the district attorney has not given timely notice to the defense that the State intends to seek the death penalty is not a case “in which a sentence of death was imposed or could be imposed.” 9 See Paragraph although the special concurring opinion acknowledges that the 1983 Constitution’s...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 4 de marzo de 2025
In the Matter of Christopher Ryan Breault
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia suspendió al abogado Christopher Ryan Breault por seis meses tras determinar que reveló repetidamente información confidencial de sus clientes y se negó a dejar de representarlos después de ser despedido.
In assessing the Special Master’s recommendation of a one- year suspension, we note that this Court has not decided many disciplinary matters concerning the improper and intentional disclosure of personal client information in violation of Rule 1.6 (a). However, as detailed by the Special Master, this violation was present in Skinner, where this Court...
(c) ABA Standards After finding that Breault violated the provisions of the GRPC with which he was charged, the Special Master applied the framework set out in the ABA Standards, which provide that, when imposing a sanction, “a court should consider the following factors: (a) the duty violated; (b) the lawyer’s mental state; (c) the potential or actual...
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”)....
To incorporate the City of Mableton; to provide a charter for the City of Mableton; to provide for incorporation, boundaries, and powers of the city; to provide for a governing authority of such city and the powers, duties, authority, election, terms, method of filling vacancies, compensation, qualifications, prohibitions, and removal from office relative...
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 · 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...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 30 de septiembre de 2025
Robinson v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas por asesinato en la comisión de un delito grave y agresión agravada de un adolescente del condado de DeKalb, al dictaminar que la evidencia fue suficiente y que los posibles errores de su abogado de juicio no cambiaron el resultado del juicio.
omitted). Under Georgia law, “[t]he testimony of a single witness is generally sufficient to establish a fact.” OCGA § 24-14-8. However, “in certain cases, including … felony cases where the only witness is an accomplice, the testimony of a single witness shall not be sufficient” to establish a fact. Id. Instead, the accomplice’s testimony must be...
3. Robinson next argues that his trial counsel provided constitutionally ineffective assistance on three grounds. We are not persuaded. To prevail on these claims, Robinson must show both deficient performance and resulting prejudice. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). To show deficient performance, Robinson “must demonstrate that...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 6 de mayo de 2025
In the Matter of Deborah Lynn Haklin
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia inhabilitó a una abogada que abandonó a una clienta que buscaba adoptar a cinco niños emparentados, rechazando la recomendación de un maestro especial de una suspensión de solo un año.
Based on Haklin’s misconduct, the special master concluded that she had violated Rules 1.2 (a),2 1.3,3 1.4 (a),4 and 1.55 of the GRPC. The maximum sanction for a single violation of Rules 1.2 and 1.3 is disbarment; the maximum sanction for a single violation of Rules 1.4 (a) and 1.5 is a public reprimand. After citing the American Bar Association Standards...
injury caused by the misconduct, and (d) aggravating and mitigating factors), the special master determined that Haklin violated her duties to pursue the client’s goals in a reasonably expeditious manner and to not abandon the client; that Haklin knowingly violated the Rules; and that the client suffered actual injury from the loss of her legal fee and...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 30 de septiembre de 2025
BOSTIC v. THE STATE (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas por asesinato en la comisión de un delito grave y robo a mano armada de Jerel Bostic y Timothy Wright en la muerte a tiros de Jamichael Walker afuera de una sala de juegos de Georgia, rechazando impugnaciones a las pruebas y a las resoluciones del juicio.
Wright also argues that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of Georgia statutory law because Clark’s accomplice testimony was not corroborated and was otherwise unbelievable. See OCGA § 24-14-8 (“The testimony of a single witness is generally sufficient to establish a fact. However, in certain cases, including ... felony cases where the only witness...
Finally, to the extent Bostic claims that the trial court erred in denying his directed verdict as to the Street Gang Act count, that claim is moot because the court nolle prossed the Street Gang Act count. See Broxton v. State, 306 Ga. 127, 136 n.6 (2019). And, as we explained in Division 2, above, there was sufficient evidence to support a conviction with...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 10 de junio de 2025
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE v. ETERNAL VIGILANCE ACTION, INC. (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que la mayoría de las reglas electorales de 2024 adoptadas por la Junta Estatal de Elecciones no estaban debidamente autorizadas por la ley estatal, al tiempo que limitó severamente quién puede demandar para impugnar tales reglas.
6. Four of the challenged rules do not survive a proper nondelegation analysis, but one does. The Appellants argue that the trial court erred in concluding that the challenged rules violate the nondelegation doctrine of the Georgia Constitution. They argue that under existing precedent, the General Assembly’s delegation of legislative power is...
We have long held that when it comes to the power of the General Assembly, the “people have clothed the Legislature with all power, except where they have made limitations[.]” Nicholas v. Hovenor, 42 Ga. 514, 517 (1871); see also Plumb v. Christie, 103 Ga. 686, 693-694 (30 SE 759) (1898); Sears v. State of Ga., 232 Ga. 547, 553 (3) (208 SE2d 93) (1974);...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 16 de septiembre de 2025
In the Matter of Craig S. Bonnell
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que un special master declaró indebidamente en rebeldía al abogado Craig Bonnell en su caso disciplinario, y devolvió el asunto para una audiencia completa sobre el fondo.
PER CURIAM. This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the report and recommendation of the State Disciplinary Review Board (the “Review Board”), which reviewed the report and recommendation issued by Special Master Kalki Yalamanchili at the request of Craig S. Bonnell (State Bar No. 067267), who has been a member of the State Bar since 2001. See Bar...
1. Procedural History On July 14, 2023, the State Bar filed a Formal Complaint charging Bonnell with violations of Rules 1.1, 1 1.3, 2 1.4(a),3 1 Rule 1.1 provides that “[a] lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client.” 2 Rule 1.3 provides that “[a] lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.” 3 Rule...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 9 de diciembre de 2025
Chestnut Ridge, LLC v. Hall County Board of Tax Assessors
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia determinó que un tribunal de primera instancia no tenía autoridad para resolver el reclamo de una empresa de que una ley tributaria de Georgia era inconstitucionalmente vaga, porque la empresa nunca notificó al Fiscal General como exige la ley.
We begin by noting that, “[w]hen the General Assembly changes the language of a statute, that typically signals an intent to change the meaning of the statute.” Allen v. State, 319 Ga. 415, 419 n.6 (2024). And 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...
In analyzing the effect of this statute, we have held that the failure to serve the Attorney General means that the trial court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction to resolve the constitutional claim. See Williams v. Kaylor, 218 Ga. 576, 578 (1963) (adopting position of majority of appellate courts throughout the country that “where service is not made on the...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 30 de septiembre de 2025
BAILEY v. MCINTOSH COUNTY (Three Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que los residentes del condado de McIntosh podían llevar adelante un referéndum para derogar una ordenanza de zonificación de Sapelo Island bajo la disposición estatal de autonomía local, revocando una orden del tribunal superior que había bloqueado la votación.
and recreational purposes.” Ga. Const. of 1945, Art. XV, Sec. II, Par. III (1966) (emphasis added). In addition, the home rule paragraph of the 1966 Amendment expressly provided that “[n]othing in this Paragraph shall affect the provisions” of the amendment’s zoning paragraph. Const. of 1945, Art. XV, Sec. II, Par. I(e) (1966). Accordingly, the 1966...
The governing authority of each county shall have legislative power to adopt clearly reasonable ordinances, resolutions, or regulations relating to its property, affairs, and local government for which no provision has been made by general law and which is not inconsistent with this Constitution or any local law applicable thereto. Any such local law shall...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 4 de marzo de 2025
Hill v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de Terrance Hill, y determinó que aunque el juez de primera instancia probablemente se equivocó al no decirle al jurado que un delincuente convicto puede alegar legítima defensa mientras porta un arma, ese error no fue lo suficientemente claro como para anular el veredicto.
To be sure, it is a fair inferential step from Floyd and Johnson to conclude that when a felon who is prohibited from possessing a firearm requests an express instruction indicating that, despite his status, he may still claim self-defense, trial counsel should assist the defendant in securing that instruction and the trial court should give it. Indeed, we...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 18 de noviembre de 2025
State v. Greathouse
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia resolvió que una ley de Georgia exige una audiencia o una admisión de culpa antes de que un juez pueda revocar la libertad condicional de una persona, incluso si el condicionado firmó un formulario renunciando a esa audiencia por adelantado para futuras violaciones.
To begin, we recall the well-settled principles that guide our consideration of a statute’s proper construction. “In interpreting statutes, we presume that the General Assembly meant what it said 5 The dissenting opinion faults the majority opinion for not answering the question this Court posed when granting certiorari. But as we have explained, our...
It is true that, generally, “[i]f there is no constitutional, statutory, or public policy prohibition against waiver, an accused may validly waive any right.” Thomas v. State, 260 Ga. 262, 263 (1990). The State, however, overlooks the express language from subsection (b) that restricts the court’s authority to revoke probation without the probationer first...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 28 de mayo de 2025
Docs of Ct, LLC v. Biotek Services, LLC
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia resolvió que una empresa que impugna un laudo arbitral por correos electrónicos indebidos entre bastidores debe demostrar que esos correos realmente cambiaron el resultado, no solo que ocurrieron.
6 Because OCGA § 9-9-13 (b) parallels 9 USC § 10, see supra n.5, federal decisions interpreting and applying this language both before and after our similar language was enacted bear on the meaning of that language today. De- cisions issued before that language was enacted are especially helpful because those decisions interpreting the same language our...
Docs of CT resists this traditional, outcome-focused under- standing of prejudice. It contends that the affected party’s “rights are prejudiced by” conduct that causes “any harm” to the party’s “right to a fair hearing” (or any other rights implicated) and that the affected party need not show “how the outcome might have been dif- ferent.” But Docs of CT...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 18 de febrero de 2025
Atlantic Games, Inc. v. Georgia Lottery Corporation
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia negó la revisión de la impugnación de una empresa contra la facultad reglamentaria de la Georgia Lottery Corporation, pero un magistrado concurrente usó la orden para exponer un caso detallado a favor de revisar un precedente de 1990 sobre la delegación legislativa.
Although “it is not easy to draw an exact line” between delegation of legislative power and legislation that merely identifies the executive branch agency responsible for executing a statute and gives that agency guidance in so doing, see S. Ry. Co. v. Melton, 133 Ga. 277, 285 (65 SE 665) (1909), the line in our historic precedent turns on the extent to...
7 See also City of Calhoun v. N. Ga. Elec. Membership Corp., 233 Ga. 759, 768-770 (5) (b) (213 SE2d 596) (1975) (statute contained sufficiently definitive standards when its purposes were appropriate, other provisions put those purposes into effect completely and thoroughly, and it limited the delegatee’s authority to applying standards set forth in the...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 26 de agosto de 2025
Gateway Pines Hahira, Lp v. Lowndes County Board of Tax Assessors
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que los tasadores de impuestos del condado aún pueden usar el enfoque de ingresos para valorar propiedades de vivienda asequible que reciben créditos fiscales federales para vivienda de bajos ingresos, corrigiendo una decisión de la Corte de Apelaciones que había prohibido el método por completo.
4 See OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B.1) (“The tax assessor shall not consider any income tax credits with respect to real property which are claimed and granted pursuant to either Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or Chapter 7 of this title in determining the fair market value of real property.”). 5 That provision states: “Except as otherwise...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 28 de enero de 2025
Brundage v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia revocó las condenas por asesinato en la comisión de un delito grave y posesión de arma de fuego de un hombre del condado de DeKalb porque su abogado no objetó cuando el fiscal les dijo erróneamente a los jurados que la legítima defensa nunca podía excusar a un delincuente convicto sorprendido con un arma.
320 Ga. 721 FINAL COPY S24A1369. BRUNDAGE v. THE STATE.
LAGRUA, Justice, concurring. I agree with the majority opinion that our prior cases on ineffective assistance of counsel and felony murder require reversal here, so I concur. Under OCGA § 16-11-138, Brundage indeed had an absolute defense to felony murder predicated on possession of a firearm by a convicted felon if the jury believed that the shooting was...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 9 de diciembre de 2025
Venticinque v. Lair
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia devolvió una disputa de custodia entre una madre y su expareja al tribunal de primera instancia, al determinar que el juez exigió incorrectamente que la madre probara que el niño sufriría daño, en lugar de exigir que la expareja lo probara.
biological parent to obtain custody over their child,” arguing that “fitness or unfitness of a parent is not always a binary and absolute conclusion, particularly when mental health is considered.” Lair suggests that the Equitable Caregiver Statute allows an adjudicated equitable caregiver to obtain physical custody where a biological parent experiences...
Lair primarily cites three cases in support of waiver, but none of them applies here. The first case, Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc., 590 US 255 (2020), was about whether federal copyright law extends to annotations in Georgia’s official annotated Code, and invoked the presumption that all citizens know the law merely as support for the necessity of...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 28 de enero de 2025
WALTON ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION v. GEORGIA POWER COMPANY (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que Nestle Purina podía cambiar su proveedor eléctrico para su planta de alimento para mascotas en Hartwell, sosteniendo que una instalación puede ser legalmente 'desmantelada' incluso sin una demolición total.
3 As we explained in Premier, [t]his is not to say that all mixed findings are reviewed for abuse of discretion. For instance, a “mixed question of constitutional law,” even if “fact-intensive,” generally calls for de novo review. Efficiency Lodge, 316 Ga. at 565 (2) (b) (ii) n.6 (punctuation omitted) (quoting Lilly v. Virginia, 527 U.S. 116, 136-137 (V)...
Afinar los resultados
Los números cuentan los documentos que encontró esta búsqueda.