Durham v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that statutory predecessor to OCGA § 17-7- 170 “was wisely and humanely framed to carry into effect that provision of the Constitution which declares, that ‘in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial’” (emphasis in original)
• “The Act makes no exceptions - none are admissible by the Courts.”
• \The Act makes no exceptions—none are admissible by the Courts.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Wear
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1898-06-25· cited 54×
• Tanner v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1981-11-02· cited 52×
• Henry v. James
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1994-10-11· cited 23×
• Brown v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1890-07-12· cited 23×
• Dennis v. Grimes
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1961-03-09· cited 22×
• Jeffries v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1976-10-27· cited 17×
• Hunley v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1898-10-13· cited 16×
• Dublin v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1906-11-08· cited 16×
• State v. Soucie
  Indiana Supreme Court· 1955-02-03· cited 15×
• State v. Collins
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1991-10-15· cited 14×
• State v. Varner
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2003-11-26· cited 12×
• Dickerson v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1963-10-24· cited 11×
• Bryning v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1952-04-08· cited 7×
• Mager v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1917-10-31· cited 7×
• Harris v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1951-05-23· cited 3×
• Bowman v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2023-02-21· cited 3×