Skip to main content

Hall v. State

Citations

  • 485 S.E.2d 755
  • 268 Ga. 89
  • 97 Fulton County D. Rep. 1635
  • 1997 Ga. LEXIS 186

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that “it is beyond question that the Due Process Clause requires that the law give a person of ordinary intelligence fair warning that her specific contemplated conduct is forbidden, so that she may conduct herself accordingly”
  • vagueness challenge to statutes not involving First Amendment freedoms must be examined in light of facts of case at hand
  • vagueness challenge to statutes not involving First Amendment freedoms must be examined in light of facts of case at hand
  • post-hoc rationales cannot save an impermissibly vague statute that allows officials to make determinations based on their subjective and ad-hoc analysis
  • post-hoc rationales cannot save an impermissibly vague statute that allows officials to make determinations based on their subjective and ad-hoc analysis

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Sears, Hunstein, Carley, Thompson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

21 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.