Skip to content
Georgia Commons
Menu

Search every collection

Search Georgia Commons

Bills, Supreme Court opinions, the Code and the two constitutions, and House and Senate meeting transcripts, in one search. Ask in plain words: the search ranks passages by meaning as well as by their words.

Filters:Supreme Court of Georgia Clear filters

Found 271 matching passages in 185 documents.

This lists every passage the search found, a page at a time. It reports what it found, which may not be everything.

  1. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · October 19, 2020

    Henderson v. State

    S20A0986

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed a Gwinnett County man's murder conviction, rejecting his claims that his speedy trial rights were violated and that his lawyer's mistakes entitled him to a new trial. The court also overruled a prior precedent that assumed such lawyer mistakes always cause harm.

    DNA testing revealed that Stridiron and Henderson’s DNA profiles were on the knife’s handle and that Stridiron’s DNA was on the knife’s blade. The volume of epithelial skin cells found on the knife’s handle matching Henderson was sufficient for the crime lab to secure a full DNA profile. An expert in forensic serology testified that this indicated that...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Henderson v. State (S20A0986), decided 2020-10-19.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Henderson v. State (S20A0986), decided 2020-10-19.

    2 more passages in this document

  2. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · March 5, 2024

    Palmer v. State

    S23A1091

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld Willie Williams Palmer's murder convictions from his fourth trial, rejecting his claims that his speedy trial rights were violated and that the trial court wrongly excluded evidence pointing to other possible suspects.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Palmer v. State (S23A1091), decided 2024-03-05.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Palmer v. State (S23A1091), decided 2024-03-05.

    2 more passages in this document

  3. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · February 21, 2023

    Bowman v. State

    S22G0303

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that a Paulding County man's 2014 trial never happened in the eyes of the law because the 12 citizens who heard his case were never sworn in as a jury, so he is entitled to be discharged and acquitted under Georgia's speedy trial statute.

    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 §...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Bowman v. State (S22G0303), decided 2023-02-21.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Bowman v. State (S22G0303), decided 2023-02-21.

  4. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · September 20, 2022

    Williams v. State

    S22A0794

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a Richmond County man's murder conviction, rejecting his self-defense claim, his argument about an accomplice's guilty plea, and his claim that a 25-month delay before his retrial violated his right to a speedy trial.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Williams v. State (S22A0794), decided 2022-09-20.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Williams v. State (S22A0794), decided 2022-09-20.

  5. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · December 20, 2022

    Davis v. State

    S22A0958

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a Fulton County man's murder conviction, rejecting his claims that his speedy trial rights were violated, that evidence about the victim's friend was wrongly excluded, and that his lawyer was ineffective.

    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)....

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Davis v. State (S22A0958), decided 2022-12-20.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Davis v. State (S22A0958), decided 2022-12-20.

    1 more passage in this document

  6. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · July 1, 2025

    Kitchens v. State

    S25A0788

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia sent a Bibb County man's murder case back to the trial court after finding the judge miscalculated key facts and misapplied the law in rejecting his claim that the state violated his right to a speedy trial.

    WARREN, Presiding Justice. Appellant Deonte Kitchens was convicted of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of Alveno Culver. 1 Kitchens filed a motion for new trial claiming, among other 1 Culver was killed on October 29, 2011. In November 2015, a Bibb County grand jury indicted Kitchens and Kelvin Carswell for various crimes...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Kitchens v. State (S25A0788), decided 2025-07-01.

    1. We begin with the legal principles underpinning the analysis of a speedy-trial claim. The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees criminal defendants “the right to a speedy . . . trial,” among other things. A defendant’s claim that the State violated this constitutional right is analyzed under January 2025. Kitchens filed a timely...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Kitchens v. State (S25A0788), decided 2025-07-01.

  7. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · June 21, 2021

    Taylor v. State

    S21A0297

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld Micayla Taylor's felony murder and aggravated assault convictions arising from a Newton County shooting, rejecting claims about insufficient evidence, a botched suppression motion, a speedy trial violation, a jury instruction, and ineffective counsel.

    4. Appellant’s next contention alleges error by the trial court in denying her plea in bar. On August 18, 2018, Appellant filed a plea in bar, asserting that her constitutional right to a speedy trial had been violated because, following her indictment, the trial of her case was continued from multiple trial calendars, primarily at the State’s request. The...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Taylor v. State (S21A0297), decided 2021-06-21.

    (a) Threshold inquiry. 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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Taylor v. State (S21A0297), decided 2021-06-21. (a) Threshold inquiry..

  8. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · June 21, 2023

    Leonard v. State

    S23A0135

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld Joshua Leonard's murder conviction for a 2010 Columbus shooting, ruling that the victim's statements identifying his shooters, made after he woke from a coma and again on the day he died, were properly admitted as dying declarations.

    Reading closing arguments as a whole, we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion when allowing the prosecutor’s reference to scripture, which was permissible rebuttal. Indeed, the prosecutor attempted to defuse Leonard’s argument and offer an explanation as to why Grimes repeatedly identified Leonard and Alexander, resorting to Biblical...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Leonard v. State (S23A0135), decided 2023-06-21.

    “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,...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Leonard v. State (S23A0135), decided 2023-06-21.

  9. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · February 7, 2023

    Rucker v. State

    S22A1316

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a man's murder conviction for a fatal home invasion in Southwest Atlanta, rejecting his arguments about a missing jury instruction and a delayed trial.

    (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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Rucker v. State (S22A1316), decided 2023-02-07. (c) Assertion of the right..

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Rucker v. State (S22A1316), decided 2023-02-07. (c) Assertion of the right..

  10. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · June 10, 2025

    State v. Embert

    S25A0054

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that a Dougherty County woman's 2019 murder trial was not automatically void just because one juror turned out to be an ineligible felon, undoing the trial court's decision to dismiss her case on speedy trial grounds.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, State v. Embert (S25A0054), decided 2025-06-10.

    (ii) Reasons for the delay: The trial court found that Embert was largely responsible for the delay for the period from February 2015 to August 2018 (three-and-one-half years) because her trial counsel filed multiple motions seeking additional time to file other motions and sought a continuance for personal medical reasons during this period. The trial...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, State v. Embert (S25A0054), decided 2025-06-10.

    2 more passages in this document

  11. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · February 6, 2024

    Redding v. State

    S23A1018

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): For the third time, the Supreme Court of Georgia sent Merrick Redding's murder case back to a Muscogee County trial court, ruling that the judge again misapplied the legal test for deciding whether Redding's speedy-trial rights were violated.

    (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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Redding v. State (S23A1018), decided 2024-02-06. (c) The assertion of the right to a speedy trial..

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Redding v. State (S23A1018), decided 2024-02-06. (c) The assertion of the right to a speedy trial..

  12. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · June 29, 2020

    Burney v. State

    S20A0216

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld Terrence Burney's malice murder conviction in the death of a 76-year-old Jones County man, rejecting claims about jury instructions, a delayed trial, and a juror who looked up legal terms online.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Burney v. State (S20A0216), decided 2020-06-29. 2. Burney next contends that the trial court erred by not conducting a Faretta hearing. We disagree..

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Burney v. State (S20A0216), decided 2020-06-29. 2. Burney next contends that the trial court erred by not conducting a Faretta hearing. We disagree..

    3 more passages in this document

  13. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · October 19, 2020

    Goins v. State

    S20A0847

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a Gwinnett County man's murder conviction for the second time, rejecting his renewed speedy trial claim and finding no reversible error in the trial court's handling of evidence and a mistrial request.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Goins v. State (S20A0847), decided 2020-10-19. 1. As we explained in upholding the sufficiency of the evidence supporting Appellant’s murder conviction in Goins I:.

    In its ten-page order on remand, the trial court correctly determined that the thirty-two-month delay between Appellant’s arrest and trial was presumptively prejudicial. The court then made detailed factual findings and legal conclusions regarding each of the Barker-Doggett factors, and after balancing the factors, the court ultimately rejected Appellant’s...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Goins v. State (S20A0847), decided 2020-10-19. 1. As we explained in upholding the sufficiency of the evidence supporting Appellant’s murder conviction in Goins I:.

  14. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · February 3, 2026

    Jenkins v. State

    S25A1050

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia dismissed a man's direct appeal from the denial of his statutory speedy trial demand, ruling he was required to use interlocutory appeal procedures instead and that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case as filed.

    COLVIN, Justice. In this case, Appellant Roshoun Jacarri Jenkins appealed directly from the dismissal of his statutory speedy trial demand, which he made pursuant to OCGA § 17-7-171. Because the dismissal of a speedy trial demand does not fall within one of the categories of cases from which a direct appeal is authorized under OCGA § 5-6-34(a), Jenkins was...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Jenkins v. State (S25A1050), decided 2026-02-03.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Jenkins v. State (S25A1050), decided 2026-02-03.

  15. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · June 16, 2026

    Price v. State

    S26A0159

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia vacated part of the ruling against a Fulton County man convicted of murder, finding the trial judge made legal errors in rejecting his claim that he was denied a speedy trial, and sent the case back for a proper analysis.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Price v. State (S26A0159), decided 2026-06-16.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Price v. State (S26A0159), decided 2026-06-16.

  16. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · May 6, 2025

    Nelson v. State

    S25A0336

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia vacated a ruling that denied a Fulton County murder defendant's motion to dismiss his indictment on speedy trial grounds, finding the trial court made factual errors and misapplied the law in weighing the delay.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Nelson v. State (S25A0336), decided 2025-05-06.

    inmates” to commit “crimes” and were “sending [inmates] into dorms to rob other [inmates] . . . , to beat them up, [and] to stab them.” And he complained about inadequate sleeping arrangements, showering facilities, and sanitation. Describing his incarceration generally, Appellant said that it had been mentally, physically, and emotionally painful. On...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Nelson v. State (S25A0336), decided 2025-05-06.

    2 more passages in this document

  17. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · May 17, 2022

    Redding v. State

    S22A0124

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia sent a Muscogee County murder case back to the trial court a second time, ruling that the judge misapplied the law and failed to properly weigh the factors used to decide speedy-trial claims.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Redding v. State (S22A0124), decided 2022-05-17. 1. As we explained in Redding I,.

    2. The Barker framework A constitutional speedy-trial claim is evaluated under the two- part framework set out in Barker. See Redding I, 309 Ga. at 128 (3). First, the trial court must consider “whether the length of time between the defendant’s arrest and trial is sufficiently long to be considered ‘presumptively prejudicial.’ If not, the speedy-trial...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Redding v. State (S22A0124), decided 2022-05-17. 2. The Barker framework.

  18. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · March 5, 2024

    McCullum v. State

    S23A0927

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld Samuel Earl McCullum's convictions for the 1998 rape and murder of Monica Blackwell and the 1999 rape of another woman, rejecting his arguments that the evidence was insufficient and that pretrial delay and joinder violated his rights.

    (a) The Length of the Delay As stated above, we agree with the trial court that the ten-plus- year delay between McCullum’s indictment and trial for C. C.’s rape was presumptively prejudicial. See Goins, 306 Ga. at 57 (2) (b). The trial court found that McCullum had been incarcerated out of state for eight of the ten-plus years that comprised the delay,...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, McCullum v. State (S23A0927), decided 2024-03-05. (a) The Length of the Delay.

    (b) The Reasons for the Delay The trial court found that from 2007 to 2009, McCullum was incarcerated in North Carolina and Kentucky, so his incarceration during that period was not attributable to the pending rape charge in Georgia. From 2009 to 2011, the trial court found, McCullum was incarcerated in Georgia while awaiting trial for C. C.’s rape but, at...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, McCullum v. State (S23A0927), decided 2024-03-05. (b) The Reasons for the Delay.

  19. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · October 1, 2024

    Redding v. State

    S24A0834

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld Merrick Redding's felony murder conviction for a fourth and final time, ruling his speedy-trial rights were not violated and that any evidence errors at trial were harmless.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Redding v. State (S24A0834), decided 2024-10-01.

    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...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Redding v. State (S24A0834), decided 2024-10-01.

  20. Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · June 2, 2026

    Sheffield v. State

    S26A0514

    Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a Coffee County man's malice murder conviction in his wife's shooting death, but sent his speedy-trial claim back to the trial court because the judge miscalculated the delay and did not properly assign blame for it.

    But there are important differences between the evidence presented in Carter and the evidence presented in this case. Ste- phens’s testimony that she maintained contact with Sheffield— including sharing two phone calls the week of the murder—is ev- idence that Stephens and Sheffield were in contact mere days be- fore the crimes, whereas the appellant and...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Sheffield v. State (S26A0514), decided 2026-06-02.

    On October 21, 2021 (one day before a scheduled hearing on pretrial motions and four days before trial started), Sheffield filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that his constitutional right to a speedy trial had been violated. No hearing was held on the motion, and no written order was issued on the motion before trial. However, at the hearing on...

    Open at this passageSupreme Court of Georgia, Sheffield v. State (S26A0514), decided 2026-06-02.

    1 more passage in this document

Narrow the results

Counts are of the documents this search found.

From

Year

Results are ranked by Voyage AI's embedding and reranking models. No model writes any text you see in a result: every passage is quoted from a stored document, and summaries written by Georgia Commons are labeled as such.

Machine-readable https://georgiacommons.org/search.md?q=right+to+a+speedy+trial · https://georgiacommons.org/index.md · MCP https://mcp.georgiacommons.org/mcp