Skip to main content

Daniel v. State

Citations

  • 677 S.E.2d 120
  • 285 Ga. 406
  • 2009 Fulton County D. Rep. 1687
  • 2009 Ga. LEXIS 247

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that there was no danger that the jury would be confused by the evidence because there were only two defendants acting in concert and the evidence was not such that it would confuse the jury as to their individual participation in the crimes
  • reviewing admissibility of an excited utterance under Georgia’s old Evidence Code
  • reviewing admissibility of an excited utterance under Georgia’s Old Evidence Code
  • use of trickery and deceit to obtain a confession does not make it inadmissible when the means employed were not calculated to procure an untrue statement
  • “Testimony ‘that the declarant appeared nervous and upset, combined with a reasonable basis for emotional upset, will usually suffice for admission under the excited utterance exception.’ ” (citation omitted)
  • that joint trial did not confuse jury regarding the evidence against each defendant shown by the fact that the jury found one defendant guilty while acquitting the other

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Thompson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

27 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.