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.
§

Grant v. State

198 Ga. App. 357 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Grant v. State

5 Citing cases

  1. Harrelson v. State

    719 S.E.2d 569 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011)   Cited 5 times

    Likewise, the trial court instructed the jury on parties to a crime. See Grant v. State, 198 Ga.App. 357, 358–359(1)(b), 401 S.E.2d 761 (1991) (parties to crime theory “embodies the theory of conspiracy insofar as it renders one not directly involved in the commission of a crime responsible as a party thereto”). FN10. Johnson, supra at 708(1)(a), 683 S.E.2d 659 (citation and punctuation omitted); OCGA § 16–2–20(b).

  2. Johnson v. State

    299 Ga. App. 706 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 19 times
    Holding that jury was authorized to find that defendant was a party to hijacking because he drove perpetrator to crime scene, had prior knowledge that perpetrator intended to steal car, and helped perpetrator flee the scene

    The trial court instructed the jury on conspiracy, which mirrors the concept of parties to a crime. See Grant v. State, 198 Ga. App. 357, 358-359 (1) (b) ( 401 SE2d 761) (1991) (parties to crime theory "embodies the theory of conspiracy insofar as it renders one not directly involved in the commission of a crime responsible as a party thereto") (citation and punctuation omitted). A defendant is a party to a crime "if he intentionally aids or abets the commission of the crime, or advises, encourages, hires, counsels, or procures another to commit it."

  3. King v. State

    295 Ga. App. 865 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 3 times

    Scott v. State, 229 Ga. 541, 544 (1) ( 192 SE2d 367) (1972). See also Grant v. State, 198 Ga. App. 357, 358-359 (1) (b) ( 401 SE2d 761) (1991); Hamby v. State, 158 Ga. App. 265 (2) ( 279 SE2d 715) (1981). Cf. Garcia v. State, 279 Ga. App. 75 ( 630 SE2d 596) (2006) (a jury instruction on lesser-included offense is authorized where "there is any evidence that the defendant is guilty of the lesser-included offense"); Gunter v. State, 243 Ga. 651, 660 (6) ( 256 SE2d 341) (1979) (stating in dicta that "it may be that conspiracy . . . is a lesser included offense in an indictment charging the commission of the crime" where the crime has not been completed).

  4. Garland v. State

    283 Ga. App. 622 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 3 times
    In Garland v. State, 283 Ga. App. 622 (642 SE2d 320) (2007), we affirmed Mack Garland's conviction for armed robbery and other crimes.

    Culberson v. State, 236 Ga. App. 482, 483 ( 512 SE2d 367) (1999).Grant v. State, 198 Ga. App. 357, 358-359 (1) (b) ( 401 SE2d 761) (1991). Here, the evidence showed that Mack knew that the victim had at least seven ounces of marijuana on December 10, 2003, and that he suggested robbing the victim for that reason.

  5. Vincent v. State

    210 Ga. App. 6 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 8 times

    This, plus defendant's participation the next morning, was sufficient to show that defendant was either the perpetrator or an aider and abettor to the crimes charged. OCGA § 16-2-20; Williams v. State, 200 Ga. App. 84, 85 (1), 86 ( 406 S.E.2d 498) (1991); Grant v. State, 198 Ga. App. 357, 358 (1) ( 401 S.E.2d 761) (1991); Harden v. State, 197 Ga. App. 686 (1) ( 399 S.E.2d 276) (1990). There was no failure of proof of venue.