Skip to main content

Davis v. State

Citations

  • 829 S.E.2d 321

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that “whether to impeach prosecution witnesses and how to do so are tactical decisions”
  • holding that appellant failed to establish prejudice stemming from counsel’s failure to object to leading questions because an objection was unlikely to have prevented the admission of the testimony
  • holding that “gruesome” video and photographic evidence depicting the crime scene and the victim’s body were “relevant to the victim’s identity and manner of death, as well as to corroborate [witnesses’] testimony”
  • holding that “gruesome” video and photographic evidence depicting the crime scene and the victim’s body were “relevant to the victim’s identity and his manner of death, as well as to corroborate [witnesses’] testimony”
  • concluding that detective’s testimony, which “did not speak directly to [witness’s] truthfulness” but instead, “involved whether aspects of [detective’s] investigation lined up with information provided by” witness, did not constitute improper bolstering
  • no showing of prejudice “because an objection likely would not have prevented the admission of the testimony” (citation and punctuation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bethel

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

25 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.