Buford v. Dearing

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the state failed to prove venue since the fact that the responding officers were employed by the county sheriffs department cannot serve as the exclusive proof that the crimes occurred in that county
• explaining that “the investigating officers’ county of employment does not, in and of itself, constitute sufficient proof of venue to meet the beyond a reasonable doubt standard”
• investigating officer’s county of employment alone does not prove venue beyond a reasonable doubt
• explaining Thompson v. State, 277 Ga. 102, 104 (3) (586 SE2d 231) (2003)
• “evidence of an investigating officer’s county of employment is insufficient standing alone to prove venue”
• evidence of street address and county for which police officer worked insufficient to establish venue

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).