 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Moore v. Cranford, A07A0316.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A probate court was held to have the discretion to go beyond the 60-day time period set forth in O.C.G.A. § 16-11-129(d)(4) with regard to the issuance of a firearms license. Therefore, summary judgment was properly granted to a probate judge who went beyond the 60-day time period before issuing a license to an applicant.
|
|||||
| Rogers v. State, A07A0551,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court did not err by allowing the State to introduce similar transaction evidence regarding defendant pawning a stolen bicycle in 2003 since the fact that defendant was not convicted of stealing the bicycle was not required to have allowed such relevant similar transaction evidence admitted at his trial for burglary.
|
|||||
| Swain v. State, A07A0247,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the evidence showed that defendant's statement regarding the commission of an armed robbery to police detective was voluntarily given, and absent any coercion, promises, or threats, suppression of the same was unwarranted. Further, because defendant had yet to be charged for the armed robbery, a lack of counsel did not require suppression.
|
|||||
| Ward v. State, A07A0760.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A custodial statement in which defendant admitted having turned an electric meter over used in the manufacture of drugs was properly admitted at trial, under O.C.G.A. § 24-9-20, and did not improperly introduce character evidence since, though the other crime referenced in the statement was not charged, it was relevant to the crime charged.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
