§

Ricks v. State

204 Ga. App. 441 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992)
Ricks v. State

4 Citing cases

  1. Bruster v. State

    291 Ga. App. 490 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 4 times
    Applying Rule 25 (c) to deem enumeration of error abandoned in appeal from criminal conviction brought by pro se appellant

    The sanction is not the suppression of the prosecution. Lackey v. State, 246 Ga. 331, 333 (2) ( 271 SE2d 478) (1980); Ricks v. State, 204 Ga. App. 441, 442 (1) ( 419 SE2d 517) (1992).Austin v. State, 286 Ga. App. 149, 152-153 (2) ( 648 SE2d 414) (2007).

  2. Austin v. State

    648 S.E.2d 414 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 9 times

    The sanction is not the suppression of the prosecution. Lackey v. State, 246 Ga. 331, 333 (2) ( 271 SE2d 478) (1980); Ricks v. State, 204 Ga. App. 441, 442 (1) ( 419 SE2d 517) (1992). Austin has not identified any evidence obtained as a result of his arrest under these warrants.

  3. King v. State

    268 Ga. App. 811 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 10 times

    Price v. State, 237 Ga. 352 ( 227 SE2d 368) (1976). Nor does it contemplate that the 180-day provision is inflexible. Ricks v. State, 204 Ga. App. 441, 443 ( 419 SE2d 517) (1992). In this case, King was in prison in Alabama when he was indicted in Georgia in May 2000, for the above offenses.

  4. Jerusheba v. State

    487 S.E.2d 465 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 2 times

    However, defendant does not seek the exclusion of any evidence obtained as a result of the arrest, and any illegal arrest, without more, would not amount to a bar to prosecution or a defense to a valid conviction. Ricks v. State, 204 Ga. App. 441, 442 (1) ( 419 S.E.2d 517). Judgment affirmed. Beasley and Smith, JJ., concur