Harris v. State

4 Citing cases

  1. Harris v. State

    261 Ga. 859 (Ga. 1992)   Cited 28 times
    Holding that "the sentencing court may not increase a sentence once the defendant begins serving it without violating the prohibition against double jeopardy in both the Georgia and Federal Constitutions"

    DECIDED FEBRUARY 13, 1992. Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Georgia — 200 Ga. App. 841. John O. Ellis, Jr., for appellant.

  2. The Limited v. Learning Childbirth Center

    566 S.E.2d 411 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 1 times

    As we noted above, Harris, supra, reversed a decision of this Court in which we held that a trial court could modify its restitution order by increasing the amount of restitution a defendant had to pay after he had begun serving his sentence. Harris v. State, 200 Ga. App. 841 ( 410 S.E.2d 123) (1991). Judge Birdsong dissented to the opinion of this Court.

  3. Harris v. State

    417 S.E.2d 223 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992)

    POPE, Judge. Our judgment in this case at 200 Ga. App. 841 ( 410 S.E.2d 123) (1991) has been reversed by the Georgia Supreme Court on certiorari. Harris v. State, 261 Ga. 859 ( 413 S.E.2d 439) (1992). Accordingly, our judgment is vacated and the judgment of the Supreme Court is made the judgment of this court.

  4. State v. Foy

    176 Ariz. 166 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 16 times
    In State v. Foy, 176 Ariz. 166, 167, 859 P.2d 789, 790 (App.1993), the court of appeals reviewed a post-judgment restitution order entered pursuant to a plea agreement.

    In a case similar to this one, the defendant claimed that the trial court's modification of his sentence, which increased restitution, was invalid because it increased the amount of restitution after formal pronouncement of sentence and occurred more than sixty days from the date of sentencing. Harris v. State, 200 Ga. App. 841, 410 S.E.2d 123, 124 (1991). The court interpreted the statutory requirements relating to restitution broadly, concluding that the objects of the law were best effected by permitting the trial court to amend a restitution order during the period of probation.