Barnett v. State

5 Citing cases

  1. Hector ex rel. Phillips v. Harmon

    328 Ga. App. 686 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 2 times

    Further, and pertinent to this case, our appellate courts have specifically considered judge/jury communications concerning a jury's ability, or inability, to reach a verdict, and routinely held that it is error for a trial judge to respond to such an inquiry in the absence of the defendant and/or his counsel. E.g., Lowery v. State, 282 Ga. at 74(4)(b)(i), 646 S.E.2d 67;Wells v. State, 297 Ga.App. 153, 159–160(2), 676 S.E.2d 821 (2009); Barnett v. State, 276 Ga.App. 238, 241–242(2), 623 S.E.2d 136 (2005). But see Stewart v. State, 165 Ga.App. 428, 429–430(2), 300 S.E.2d 331 (1983) (trial court's response of “keep on trying” to deadlocked jurors “not so material to appellant's case as to require her presence and that of her counsel.”).

  2. Lee v. Phillips

    A14A0188 (Ga. Ct. App. Jul. 15, 2014)

    Further, and pertinent to this case, our appellate courts have specifically considered judge/jury communications concerning a jury's ability, or inability, to reach a verdict, and routinely held that it is error for a trial judge to respond to such an inquiry in the absence of the defendant and/or his counsel. E.g., Lowery v. State, 282 Ga. at 74 (4) (b) (i); Wells v. State, 297 Ga. App. 153, 159-160 (2) (676 SE2d 821) (2009); Barnett v. State, 276 Ga. App. 238, 241-242 (2) (623 SE2d 136) (2005). But see Stewart v. State, 165 Ga. App. 428, 429-430 (2) (300 SE2d 331) (1983) (trial court's response of "keep on trying" to deadlocked jurors "not so material to appellant's case as to require her presence and that of her counsel.").

  3. Robinson v. State

    724 S.E.2d 846 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012)   Cited 4 times
    Affirming conviction where evidence established that housing complex was “public assistance housing,” not merely “public housing”

    Accordingly, Robinson's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his conviction for possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute within 1,000 feet of a public housing project has no merit. OCGA §§ 8–3–1; 8–3–2; Walker, supra; Barnett v. State, 276 Ga.App. 238, 240(1), 623 S.E.2d 136 (2005); Haywood v. State, 248 Ga.App. 210, 212(2), 546 S.E.2d 325 (2001); compare Williams v. State, 303 Ga.App. 222, 224(1), 692 S.E.2d 820 (2010) (conviction reversed because no evidence was presented establishing that the housing project was publicly owned or operated; nor that the housing project was occupied by low and moderate income families). 16. Ingram v. State, 277 Ga. 46, 49(3), 586 S.E.2d 221 (2003); Eller v. State, 294 Ga.App. 77, 82(4)(b), 668 S.E.2d 755 (2008).

  4. Williams v. the State

    303 Ga. App. 222 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 18 times
    Concluding no harm resulted from denial of mistrial based upon State's violation of trial court's evidentiary ruling

    See Mahone, 296 Ga. App. at 374-376 (3); Collins v. State, 278 Ga. App. 103, 105-106 (1) (b) ( 628 SE2d 148) (2006); Johnson v. State, 214 Ga. App. 77, 79-81 (2) ( 447 SE2d 74) (1994). Compare Barnett v. State, 276 Ga. App. 238, 240 (1) ( 623 SE2d 136) (2005) (offense established by testimony that the housing authority owned the apartments where the drug transaction occurred and that families of lower income lived there); Haywood v. State, 248 Ga. App. 210, 212 (2) ( 546 SE2d 325) (2001) (offense established by testimony that the drug crime occurred at a publicly operated low to moderate-income housing project run by the housing authority). 2.

  5. Collins v. State

    278 Ga. App. 103 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 10 times

    See Banks v. State ("public housing project subsidized by the federal government and the Douglas County Housing Authority"); Menefee v. State ("identified the housing project as a City of Marietta Housing Authority housing project"); Washington v. State ("[t]here also is testimony in the record indicating that at the time of the transactions in question defendant was within 1,000 feet of a public housing project"). Barnett v. State, 276 Ga. App. 238, 240 (1) ( 623 SE2d 136) (2005).Haywood v. State, 248 Ga. App. 210, 212 (2) ( 546 SE2d 325) (2001).