Perez v. State

5 Citing cases

  1. Ross v. State

    310 Ga. App. 326 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011)   Cited 79 times
    In Ross, the defendant filed a motion asserting that his sentence was void in “substantially the same motion” as he had filed earlier in the same court. Although the defendant had attempted to appeal the dismissal of his earlier motion, his appeal was dismissed as untimely.

    In this respect, it matters not that the dismissal of Ross's previous appeal did not reach the merits of Ross's claim because the dismissal, nevertheless, constitutes binding law of the case.Perez v. State, 263 Ga. App. 411, 412 ( 588 SE2d 269) (2003) (citation and punctuation omitted); see OCGA § 9-11-60 (h) (providing, inter alia, that "any ruling by the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals in a case shall be binding in all subsequent proceedings in that case in the lower court and in the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals as the case may be").Perez, 263 Ga. App. at 412 (citation and punctuation omitted); see also Moon v. State, 287 Ga. 304, 309 ( 696 SE2d 55) (2010) (same); Roulain v. Martin, 266 Ga. 353, 354 ( 466 SE2d 837) (1996) (same).

  2. State v. Mizell

    288 Ga. 474 (Ga. 2011)   Cited 18 times
    Reversing trial court's dismissal of indictment where missing evidence was not constitutionally material and not addressing lower court's finding as to whether State acted in bad faith

    Moreover, the law of the case doctrine applies only when the same issue has been actually litigated and decided. See State v. Lejeune, 277 Ga. 749, 756 ( 594 SE2d 637) (2004); Perez v. State, 263 Ga. App. 411, 412 ( 588 SE2d 269) (2003). Here, Mizell did not file the motion to dismiss the indictment until after the trial court granted the new trial.

  3. State v. Mizell

    S10A2064 (Ga. Jan. 24, 2010)

    Moreover, the law of the case doctrine applies only when the same issue has been actually litigated and decided. See State v. Lejeune, 277 Ga. 749, 756 ( 594 SE2d 637) (2004); Perez v. State, 263 Ga. App. 411, 412 ( 588 SE2d 269) (2003). Here, Mizell did not file the motion to dismiss the indictment until after the trial court granted the new trial.

  4. State v. Lejeune

    277 Ga. 749 (Ga. 2004)   Cited 19 times
    Holding that the independent source doctrine was applicable where evidence was first obtained pursuant to a warrant unsupported by probable cause, but after that first warrant was held invalid, the State gave a redacted version of the case file to a new investigator who lacked particular knowledge of the prior evidence and who later obtained similar evidence based on an independent source pursuant to a second, lawful warrant

    ); Laster v. State, 268 Ga. 172, 173 (1) ( 486 S.E.2d 153) (1997) (In a jury trial, jeopardy attaches when a jury is impaneled and sworn); Perkinson v. State, 273 Ga. 491, 496, n. 3 ( 542 S.E.2d 92) (2001). See Swain v. State, 251 Ga. App. 110, 113 (1) ( 552 S.E.2d 880) (2001); Smith v. Air Touch Cellular of Ga., 244 Ga. App. 71, 73-74 (3) ( 534 S.E.2d 832) (2000); Perez v. State, 263 Ga. App. 411, 412 ( 588 S.E.2d 269) (2003). The evidence produced in the second search was not the same evidence produced in the first search, [and] there is no showing that the evidence produced in the second search was in any way dependent on the evidence produced in the first search.

  5. Wimbush v. State

    No. A23A0845 (Ga. Ct. App. Mar. 22, 2023)

    Accordingly, Wimbush is barred from seeking review of the trial court's order dismissing the motions. See Rice v. State, 354 Ga.App. 103, 107-108 (840 S.E.2d 508) (2020); Ross, 310 Ga.App. at 327-328; Perez v. State, 263 Ga.App. 411, 412 (588 S.E.2d 269) (2003). "It is axiomatic that the same issue cannot be relitigated ad infinitum." Echols v. State, 243 Ga.App. 775, 776 (534 S.E.2d 464) (2000)