Skip to main content

Cleveland v. Bryant

Citations

  • 512 S.E.2d 360
  • 236 Ga. App. 459
  • 99 Fulton County D. Rep. 881
  • 1999 Ga. App. LEXIS 205

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 computer-generated animation illustrating an accident reconstructionist’s opinion of -23- how the accident occurred is admissible if it fairly and accurately represents the scene it seeks to depict
  • computer-generated animation, which merely illustrates the witness's testimony, is admissible if it is a fair and accurate representation of the scene sought to be depicted
  • computer-generated animation, which merely illustrates the witness's testimony, is admissible if it is a fair and accurate representation of the scene sought to be depicted
  • animated videotape illustrating an expert’s opinion is admissible if it is a fair and accurate representation of the expert’s opinion as to how the incident occurred
  • statements by party to police officer at scene of accident were admissible as statements against interest and, in view of the testimony of that party, as prior inconsistent statements
  • allowing a CGA as illustrative evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Johnson, Smith, Barnes

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Cleveland v. Bryant

2 other CourtListener records share this case 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.