Skip to main content

Pender v. State

Citations

  • 856 S.E.2d 302
  • 311 Ga. 98

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that jury could infer that defendant rubbed child victim’s genital area to arouse his own sexual desires, where, among other things, there was evidence that the defendant took nude photographs of the victim
  • following trial, the jury found the appellant guilty on seven counts of the indictment, but was unable to reach a verdict on two of the counts, which were placed on the dead docket; a direct appeal followed
  • applying plain error standard to the appellant’s unpreserved Confrontation Clause claim
  • “A lack of intent to restore the property to its rightful owner can be demonstrated by direct evidence or inferred from the circumstances.”
  • no plain error because even assuming a firearms examiner’s statement was “tes- timonial,” any error in admitting it had no effect on the outcome of trial
  • evidence was sufficient to support theft by receiving stolen property conviction where the State 56 presented evidence that the defendant was in possession of the truck that had been stolen by his accomplice

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

18 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

48 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.