Harrell 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 OCGA § 16-8-3 contains “no requirement of proof of pecuniary loss” in a case where the defendant purchased an automobile with a fraudulent bank draft
• defendant created counterfeit document to purchase vehicle

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Stratacos v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2013-07-11· cited 18×
• Arnold v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1993-11-10· cited 10×
• Ellerbee v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2002-07-11· cited 7×
• Smith v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1990-09-04· cited 4×
• Bishop v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1996-10-22· cited 4×
• Scott v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2006-03-03· cited 1×
• Wilburn v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1991-09-03

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Jackson v. Virginia
  Supreme Court· 1979-10-01· cited 79,490×
• De Palma v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1969-09-08· cited 211×
• Crawford v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1986-04-14· cited 6×
• Wilson v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1951-10-04· cited 6×