Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Godfrey v. State

3 Citing cases

  1. Godfrey v. Francis

    251 Ga. 652 (Ga. 1983)   Cited 30 times
    Holding that the appellant did not have "a constitutional right to the presence of counsel during the state’s psychiatric examination" and that " full, separate, second [Miranda] warning was not necessary" because the appellant had been given "a full and proper Miranda warning at the time of his arrest." (citation and punctuation ‘ omitted)

    On direct appeal, we concluded that the two statutory aggravating circumstances, the murders of the two women, were mutually supporting, vacated the death penalty for the murder of his wife Mildred Godfrey, and affirmed the sentence of death for the murder of Chessie Wilkerson, his mother-in-law. Godfrey v. State, 248 Ga. 616 ( 284 S.E.2d 422) (1981). Godfrey then filed for a writ of habeas corpus, which was denied.

  2. Godfrey v. Kemp

    836 F.2d 1557 (11th Cir. 1988)   Cited 17 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Godfrey, the Eleventh Circuit addressed a very different question, namely, whether an error in a jury instruction on intent (where the court instructed the jury to presume defendant had the intent) was harmless, where defendant presented evidence at trial that he could not recall the events surrounding the murder of his wife and mother-in-law, even after being administered sodium amytal.

    The Georgia trial court again sentenced Godfrey to death, and the Georgia Supreme Court again affirmed. Godfrey v. State, 248 Ga. 616, 284 S.E.2d 422 (1981). The U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider Godfrey's case again.

  3. Whalen v. State

    492 A.2d 552 (Del. 1985)   Cited 50 times
    Holding that trial court's instruction implying that the jury had to be unanimous in imposing a sentence of life imprisonment violated defendant's constitutional rights because "this instruction could have been clearer — and should have been"

    Consequently, a new jury has been impaneled in numerous subsequent Georgia cases when the original decision was remanded for a new penalty hearing. See, Godfrey v. State, Ga.Supr., 248 Ga. 616, 284 S.E.2d 422 (1981); Stevens v. State, Ga.Supr., 245 Ga. 583, 266 S.E.2d 194, 196 (1980); Burger v. State, Ga.Supr., 245 Ga. 458, 265 S.E.2d 796, 798 (1980); Sprouse v. State, Ga.Supr., 242 Ga. 831, 252 S.E.2d 173, 176 (1979); Fleming v. State, Ga.Supr., 243 Ga. 120, 252 S.E.2d 609, 611 (1979). A similar conclusion was reached in Messer v. State, Fla.Supr., 330 So.2d 137 (1976), where the Florida Supreme Court reasoned that a new jury should be impaneled even though it would "result in a hearing before a different jury from that which heard the evidence upon which the verdict of guilty was rendered".