Skip to main content

Adams v. State

Citations

  • 392 S.E.2d 866
  • 260 Ga. 298

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that a trial court’s decision concerning the marital privilege is reviewed for an abuse of 17 discretion
  • highly improbable that State’s comment that sequestration of jurors would prevent one of defendant’s associates from “buying . . . them off” contributed to the verdict
  • highly improbable that State’s comment that sequestration of jurors would prevent one of defendant’s associates from “buying . . . them off” contributed to the verdict
  • prosecutor’s deduction that defendant had killed eyewitnesses was permissible, “regardless of how illogical and unreasonable,” and was “a matter for reply by adverse counsel, not for rebuke by the court”
  • district attorney’s statement during closing argument that “there are no eyewitnesses [to the crime] because [the defendant’s] done away with them” was permissible deduction from evidence, not statement of facts not in evidence
  • district attorney’s statement during closing 5 argument that “there are no eyewitnesses [to the crime] because [the defendant’s] done away with them” was permissible deduction from evidence, not statement of facts not in evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Clarke

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.