 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Byrd v. State, A05A1607. A05A1649.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court's denial of defendants' motion for discharge and acquittal of multiple criminal charges, arising from the ransacking of a historic cemetery, was proper where there was no finding that the prosecutor engaged in intentional misconduct to cause a mistrial; the trial court's findings were not clearly erroneous.
|
|||||
| Collections of Life & Heritage, Inc. v. Gaston-Thacker, A05A1716.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although a partner who filed bankruptcy did not report a partnership judgment against a judgment debtor on its bankruptcy schedule, the partnership was not judicially estopped from collecting the debt against the debtor in a writ of fieri facias proceeding, as the bankruptcy trustee was apprised of the claim and chose to disregard it.
|
|||||
| Forde v. State, A05A1936.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant claimed to have a gun, threatened to blow the victim's head off, and the victim saw a bulge in defendant's pants where the gun was allegedly hidden, the evidence was sufficient to find defendant guilty of armed robbery under O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41(a).
|
|||||
| Gregory v. State, A05A1736.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the State's criminal case against defendant was based on direct and circumstantial evidence and defendant requested that a jury charge be given on circumstantial evidence, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 24-4-6, the trial court's failure to give the requested charge was harmless error where the State's case against defendant was overwhelming.
|
|||||
| Hall v. State, A05A2309.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where person who stole victim's vehicle had distinctive hairstyle and where defendant, who had same hairstyle, was apprehended while in possession of vehicle soon after crime was committed, sufficient evidence supported armed robbery, aggravated assault with intent to rob, and possessing firearm during commission of felony convictions.
|
|||||
| Hines v. State, A05A1800.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's counsel's deficient performance in failing to object to a police detective's comment on defendant's decision to remain silent when he was interviewed did not require reversal of defendant's conviction where no prejudice was shown; the evidence against defendant was strong and the comments were merely made in passing.
|
|||||
| Naik v. State, A05A2337.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a police officer ensured that defendant's passenger was unarmed and could get home safely, and he then had defendant's vehicle impounded prior to giving defendant notification of her implied consent rights under O.C.G.A. § 40-6-392(a)(4), the 18-minute delay was timely and suppression of the breath test was properly denied.
|
|||||
| Pless v. State, A05A2320.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where fire occurred in early morning, there was sufficient evidence under O.C.G.A. § 16-7-60(a)(5) that it was reasonably foreseeable that human life was endangered to convict defendant of first degree arson. People were sometimes on premises after hours. There was testimony that fire presented danger to nearby residents, public, and firefighters.
|
|||||
| State v. Stafford, A05A1849.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: It was error for a trial court to grant defendant's suppression motion with respect to DNA evidence obtained pursuant to a search warrant, as any failure by the State to comply with O.C.G.A. § 17-5-25 was merely technical; the warrant received by defendant was unsigned and did not specify the date or time of the warrant's execution.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
