 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| In the Matter of Maxwell, S06Y0543.,
SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA, February 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an attorney met with opposing counsel's clients without counsel's consent, and because the attorney provided counsel with an edited version without disclosing that it was edited, the attorney violated Ga. St. Bar R. 4-102(d):4.2, 8.4; therefore, the attorney was suspended for six months with an automatic reinstatement.
|
|||||
| Martin v. Astudillo, S06A0401.,
SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA, February 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court was not authorized to remand a habeas proceeding to another superior court, or to order the filing of an extraordinary motion for new trial in another superior court. A final order transferring defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claims to another county was void ab initio as an unauthorized exercise of authority.
|
|||||
| Murrell v. Ricks, S06A0004.,
SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA, February 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order granting habeas relief on grounds that defendant's trial counsel was ineffective was reversed, as counsel's performance could not be deficient based on a failure to contest the receipt of medical information inadmissible under the rape shield statute and the outcome would not have been different if the evidence would have been admissible.
|
|||||
| Patel v. Patel, S06A0342.,
SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA, February 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since the evidence did not show that the rights of the parties could not be fully protected without the appointment of a receiver, a trial court did not err in refusing to appoint a receiver. A lender did not present any evidence of insolvency, waste, mismanagement, or misappropriation of assets on the part of the owners of a restaurant.
|
|||||
| Pitts v. State, S05G1156.,
SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA, February 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the primary purpose of a statement made by an unavailable victim in her 911 call was to thwart an ongoing crime or seek rescue from immediate peril, and not establish evidence that could be used in a future prosecution, her statement was not testimonial, and admission of the same did not violate the Confrontation Clause.
|
|||||
| Sherrod v. State, S05A1952.,
SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA, February 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Statutory presumption in O.C.G.A. § 16-8-4(c)(2) was mandatory; if the State proved that the demand letter was sent in accordance with the statute, defendant "shall be presumed" to have committed the elements of the crime. The mandatory presumption of O.C.G.A. § 16-8-4(c)(2) was unconstitutional.
|
|||||
| Terry v. Jenkins, S05A2064.,
SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA, February 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Counsel for an inmate convicted of murder provided ineffective assistance, under the Sixth Amendment, by not interviewing available witnesses about their theory that another committed the murders their client was convicted of and for not interviewing witnesses about their client's claim that others committed the crimes and threatened his family.
|
|||||
| Williams v. State, S06A0544.,
SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA, February 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly re-instructed jury on definition of voluntary manslaughter by charging the entire pattern charge, including that if there was an interval of time between provocation and the killing, the killing could have been considered revenge and punished as murder. Ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim required remand.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
