Skip to main content

Brown v. State

Citations

  • 302 Ga. 454
  • 807 S.E.2d 369

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that trial court’s comment did not violate OCGA § 17-8-57, where “the comment was in the nature of a permissible clarification of procedure”
  • holding that the trial court’s explanation to the jury about why the defendant’s video-recorded interview with the police had been redacted did not violate OCGA § 17-8-57
  • stating that there is no improper bolstering when a witness's statement does not directly address the credibility of another witness
  • stating that there is no improper bolstering when a witness’s statement does not directly address the credibility of another witness
  • “It was for the jury to determine the credibility of the witnesses and to resolve any conflicts or inconsistencies in the evidence.”
  • “When a witness’s statement does not directly address the credibility of another witness . . . there is no improper bolstering.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Nahmias

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

76 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

28 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.