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:2020 Quitar filtros
Se encontraron 298 pasajes en 150 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 · 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 · 6 de abril de 2020
Martin v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas de Marquez Deshawn Martin por dos asesinatos cometidos durante robos, rechazando su alegato de que su abogado debió haber luchado más por las instrucciones al jurado, pero devolvió el caso porque fue sentenciado indebidamente por cuatro cargos de asesinato en lugar de dos.
5 During the charge conference, the trial court proposed an instruction that did not include the additional language Martin’s counsel had requested, noting that it had “cut some of the stuff in that charge,” but inviting Martin’s counsel to provide different language. Both Martin’s counsel and the prosecutor declined, and the court charged the jury with the...
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 · 10 de agosto de 2020
Arnold v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de un hombre por disparar a un cliente de una gasolinera Chevron, rechazando su alegato de que su abogado debió haber objetado partes del alegato final del fiscal.
It is not improper for a prosecutor to argue that a jury should send a message to the community by convicting a defendant. See Poellnitz v. State, 296 Ga. 134, 136 (3) (765 SE2d 343) (2014) (“[I]t is not improper for a prosecutor to appeal to the jury to convict for the safety of the community or to argue to the jury the necessity for enforcement of the law...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de diciembre de 2020
In the Matter of Christopher John Palazzola
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia suspendió al abogado de Atlanta Christopher Palazzola del ejercicio del derecho, pero como ya había dejado de ejercer voluntariamente el 1 de junio de 2020, la suspensión se aplicó retroactivamente y fue reincorporado de inmediato con condiciones que exigen una revisión de gestión de la práctica jurídica.
(b) Imposition of the suspension nunc pro tunc. In a motion filed in this Court after the Review Board’s report was issued and the matter returned here, Palazzola asked that we impose any discipline nunc pro tunc to June 1, 2020, the date on which the motion baldly asserted that he closed his law practice. As the State Bar pointed out in its response to his...
PER CURIAM. This disciplinary matter is back before this Court on the report and recommendation of the State Disciplinary Review Board, which reviewed the report and recommendation issued by Special Master S. Jeffrey Rusbridge at the request of the respondent attorney, Christopher John Palazzola (State Bar No. 559321), pursuant to Bar Rule 4-216 (d).1 While...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 10 de agosto de 2020
Hood v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas de Diara Hood por asesinato en la comisión de un delito grave y delitos relacionados por atraer a dos hombres a una emboscada de robo, pero determinó que el tribunal de primera instancia cometió dos errores de sentencia que deben corregirse.
3. Hood also asserts that the trial court erred when charging the jury on other-acts evidence by instructing that the State was required to prove motive. Specifically, before any witness testified about the November 2013 robbery and again as part of its final charge to the jury, the trial court instructed the jury as follows: In order to prove its case in...
Records from Carden’s phone showed multiple communications on July 29 with a phone number that investigators linked to Hood. At 2:59 a.m., Carden texted “OK almost there,” and at 3:08 a.m., he texted, “At shell one on the ritd [sic].” And in the three hours before his death, Carden continued to make and receive 27 calls and numerous text messages to and...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 20 de abril de 2020
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 Fulton, al determinar que su abogado de juicio no fue ineficaz por no argumentar que la muerte fue accidental durante una asfixia erótica consensuada.
Because, as the trial court implicitly found, Williams never told Fair about engaging in erotic asphyxiation, Fair did not act unreasonably when he did not investigate or develop on his own this not-so-obvious line of defense. See Strickland, 466 U. S. at 691 (III) (A) (explaining that the reasonableness of trial counsel’s investigation decisions “depends...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 6 de abril de 2020
Frazier 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 Washington, al determinar que los jurados podían razonablemente concluir que fue parte de un intento de robo a mano armada que llevó al tiroteo fatal de su cómplice.
To convict Appellant of felony murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, the State was not required to prove that he personally fired the shot that killed Griner, only that Appellant was a party to the crimes, meaning that he intentionally aided or abetted in the commission of the crimes or intentionally advised, encouraged,...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 16 de junio de 2020
Heard v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia revocó las condenas por asesinato y robo a mano armada de un hombre del condado de Clayton, al determinar que los jurados nunca debieron escuchar evidencia de que él cometió un robo de auto y secuestro no relacionado meses después.
The similar (but not unique) features of the charged and uncharged crimes in this case are undermined by the major differences between them. See Lail, supra (holding that the “major dissimilarities” between the charged and uncharged bank robberies were “more striking” than the four similarities between them, none of which could be called a “signature”...
(g) Harm. Based on the discussion above, we conclude that the State failed to show a relevant purpose for the other acts evidence; the trial court therefore abused its discretion by admitting that evidence under Rule 404 (b). The trial court’s evidentiary error requires reversal of Appellant’s convictions unless it can be deemed harmless, meaning that “‘it...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 7 de diciembre de 2020
Thrift v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato en el ámbito de un delito grave (felony murder) de un hombre del condado de Ware por la desaparición de su primo en 1991, dictaminando que sus repetidas confesiones de haber matado a la víctima fueron suficientes como prueba aunque nunca se encontró el cuerpo.
8. Thrift also argues that the trial court erred by restricting his counsel’s cross-examination of a State’s witness concerning statements Rouse made prior to his disappearance that he was going to disappear because he owed money for drugs. During the cross-examination of one of the State’s witnesses, who was a friend of both Rouse and Thrift, Thrift’s...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 18 de mayo de 2020
JACKSON v. RAFFENSPERGER
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia revivió la demanda de una consultora de lactancia contra la ley de licencias de Georgia, al dictaminar que la Constitución de Georgia protege un derecho a trabajar en la profesión que uno elija y que consultoras de lactancia igualmente calificadas pueden ser tratadas como iguales ante la ley.
CLCs work in many settings, including in people’s homes. CLCs are spread across Georgia and are therefore more available to rural Georgians and minority Georgians than are IBCLCs, who are concentrated in metro Atlanta and other urban areas and often are nurses and other healthcare professionals who lack the time to provide full-time breastfeeding support to...
The General Assembly acknowledges that the application of specific knowledge and skills relating to breastfeeding is important to the health of mothers and babies and acknowledges further that the rendering of sound lactation care and services in hospitals, physician practices, private homes, and other settings requires trained and competent professionals....
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 10 de febrero de 2020
CITY OF ATLANTA v. ATLANTA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL SYSTEM
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que la demanda de las Escuelas Públicas de Atlanta sobre una pequeña anexión de la Ciudad de Atlanta no era una controversia legal real que los tribunales pudieran decidir, porque la propiedad anexada no tenía efecto alguno sobre el sistema escolar.
Though the 1950 LCA continued under the Georgia Constitution of 1976, the 1983 Constitution prohibited any future local amendments. In addition, pre-existing local amendments were required to be re-adopted by local legislation, without being further amended, prior to July 1, 1987, and, if not, they would be deemed to be “repealed and . . . deleted” by...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 19 de octubre de 2020
Hill v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas de Otis Hill por asesinato, intento de asesinato y secuestro en la muerte de Christina Wellington y el ataque a tiros a Marshall Wellington, pero corrigió dos errores de sentencia en los que cargos menores debieron haberse fusionado.
Hill’s characterization of the court’s instructions is not supported by the record. Before trial, the court provided the jurors with notepads and pencils and instructed the jurors that they were allowed, but not required, to take notes. The court instructed the jurors from the pattern jury instructions:3 The notes you take are for your use only and are not...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de diciembre de 2020
Armstrong v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de Jhakeem Armstrong, dictaminando que la evidencia de pandillas usada para establecer su motivo fue admitida correctamente y que los errores relacionados no afectaron el resultado del juicio.
PETERSON, Justice. Jhakeem Armstrong appeals his conviction for malice murder for the death of Robert Parrish, Jr. (“Parrish”).1 He argues that the
310 Ga. 598 FINAL COPY S20A1364. ARMSTRONG v. THE STATE.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 18 de mayo de 2020
San Miguel Produce, Inc. v. L.G. Herndon Jr. Farms, Inc
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia respondió tres preguntas certificadas sobre la ley de licencias de comerciantes agrícolas de Georgia, resolviendo que una empresa de productos agrícolas que actúa como comerciante debe tener licencia y que no obtenerla puede impedirle hacer cumplir un contrato comercial ante los tribunales.
Moreover, given the significant and undisputed role that agriculture plays in the economy of Georgia, as well as the interest of all citizens of Georgia in a reliable and cost-effective food supply, legislation to ensure that Georgia farmers are protected in their transactions with dealers is regulation in the public interest. Like the similar federal PACA,...
According to the district court’s order, many of the parties’ claims have been abandoned, and the remaining claims asserted by Herndon Farms concern two alleged breaches of the GSA by San Miguel: failing to pay invoices on delivered produce and inducing Herndon Farms to grow produce before terminating the GSA. San Miguel’s remaining claims, apart from a...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 10 de febrero de 2020
State v. Williams
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia restableció la condena de un hombre por abuso sexual agravado, al determinar que, aunque el juez de primera instancia dio una instrucción al jurado legalmente incorrecta sobre la capacidad de consentir de una niña pequeña, el error no afectó el resultado del juicio dada la solidez de la evidencia.
subsequent decisions in Duncan and Laster, we agree with the Court of Appeals that the trial court’s instruction on underage consent was clearly erroneous when coupled with the charge on aggravated sexual battery. In Watson, we recognized that lack of consent was a textual element of the crime of sexual battery. 297 Ga. at 719. We also determined that the...
BENHAM, Justice. We granted a writ of certiorari to determine whether the Court of Appeals correctly reversed Kenneth Howard Williams’ conviction for aggravated sexual battery (OCGA § 16-6-22.21) based on its conclusion that the trial court gave an erroneous charge to the jury concerning an underage victim’s capacity to consent. The parties addressed the...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 18 de mayo de 2020
Hood v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato en la modalidad de delito grave (felony murder) de un hombre del condado de DeKalb, al determinar que la decisión de su abogado de juicio de no consultar a un experto en residuos de disparo no lo privó de un juicio justo.
And fourth, Hood contends that Robinson could have explained that a self-inflicted gunshot wound was possible given McGriff’s arm length, the length of the weapon used, “and the presence of visible particles in the sweater.” But that argument is greatly undercut by Robinson’s own testimony that he had “no issues” with Investigator Gochenouer’s distance...
In sum, given the strong evidence of Hood’s guilt, it is not reasonably probable that the outcome of the trial would have been different even if Robinson had testified at trial. That is because three of the four points from Robinson’s testimony that Hood highlights were either already made by trial counsel; consistent with the State’s expert testimony; or...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 19 de octubre de 2020
Gray v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que un juez de primera instancia conserva el poder de modificar una sentencia penal bajo la ley de modificación de sentencias de Georgia aunque el juez decida después del plazo de un año, siempre que la solicitud de modificación se haya presentado dentro de ese año.
Moreover, we disagree with the Court of Appeals that the legislature rejected the common-law rule because the legislature did not expressly write the common-law rule into the current version of the statute. See Gray, 351 Ga. App. at 706. Although the legislature was aware of and could have codified the common-law rule, we cannot assume that omitting the...
2. The central issue in this case is whether a trial court retains jurisdiction under OCGA § 17-10-1 (f) to modify a sentence when the motion to modify was filed within the one-year time limit. “[W]e first look to the text because a statute draws its meaning from its text.” Stubbs v. Hall, 308 Ga. 354, 363 (4) (840 SE2d 407) (2020) (citation and punctuation...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 8 de septiembre de 2020
Butler v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia determinó que la evidencia presentada en el juicio era suficiente para condenar a Patrick Butler por asesinato, pero anuló sus condenas porque el juez de primera instancia usó la prueba legal equivocada al permitir que los fiscales mencionaran su antigua condena por obstrucción.
As to prejudice, on the one hand, the prior conviction and the State’s questioning — asking whether Appellant committed violence against a police officer just doing his job — raised the risk that the jury would make the highly prejudicial and forbidden inference that when Appellant shot the victim, he must have been acting in conformity with his violent...
Afinar los resultados
Los números cuentan los documentos que encontró esta búsqueda.