Dorsey v. State

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 scalpel is not designed as a dangerous weapon, but it may become one under certain circumstances
• holding that a scalpel is not designed as a dangerous weapon, but it may become one under certain circumstances
• construing \any other dangerous or deadly weapon\ as a catch-all phrase
• construing \any other dangerous or deadly weapon\ as a catch-all phrase
• rejecting vagueness challenge to prosecution of defendant for possession of a scalpel as a “dangerous or deadly weapon or instrument” and noting that “[a] scalpel in a physician’s bag may be just a scalpel; a ‘scalpel’ in a pocket may be a concealed dangerous weapon”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Professional Standards Commission v. Alberson
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2005-04-19· cited 14×
• Bryant v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2007-07-10· cited 13×
• A.P.E. v. People
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 2001-03-26· cited 9×
• In the Interest of L. N. M.
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1996-08-22· cited 4×
• Small v. Bud-K Worldwide, Inc.
  E.D. New York· 2012-09-28· cited 2×

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Hargrove v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1984-10-02· cited 24×
• Davis v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1987-09-15· cited 18×
• Simmons v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1993-01-08· cited 10×
• Oliver v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1962-09-05· cited 3×
• Carr v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1990-07-13· cited 2×