M.G. v. J.C.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the canon of constitutional doubt “is a tool for choosing between competing plausible interpretations of a statutory text”
• adopting formal and modified categorical approaches for determining under OCGA § 17-10-7 when a federal or out-of-state felony conviction “which if committed within this state would be a felony”
• disapproving of the use of the “conduct” approach in evaluating out-of-state convictions for use as predicate convictions under OCGA § 17-10-7 (a) and (c)
• affirming the judgment of the Court of Appeals under the “right for any reason” doctrine
• affirming the judgment of the Court of Appeals under the “right-for-any-reason doctrine”
• observing the “fundamental principle that this Court is bound by the Constitution of the United States as its provisions are construed and applied by the Supreme Court of the United States” (cleaned up)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).