State v. Gardner

3 Citing cases

  1. Hendricks v. State

    283 Ga. 470 (Ga. 2008)   Cited 6 times

    However, "[a] confession made by one who is insane is not the product of `a rational intellect and a free will,' and is, thus, not voluntarily made. [Cits.]" State v. Gardner, 254 Ga. 264, 265 ( 328 SE2d 546) (1985). A review of the transcript of the hearing conducted on Hendricks' motion shows that the evidence did not demand a finding that he was insane at the time he made the statement.

  2. State v. Frye

    205 Ga. App. 508 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 17 times
    In State v. Frye, 205 Ga. App. 508, 509 (422 S.E.2d 915), we used a two-prong test to determine whether a trial court should exclude identification evidence.

    Accordingly, since appellee's motion was made and ruled upon prior to the jury having been sworn, we hold that the State's appeal of the trial court's ruling is within the purview of OCGA ยง 5-7-1 (4). State v. Gardner, 254 Ga. 264 ( 328 S.E.2d 546) (1985). Accord State v. Strickman, 253 Ga. 287 ( 319 S.E.2d 864) (1984); State v. McCard, 173 Ga. App. 504 ( 326 S.E.2d 856) (1985).

  3. The State v. Brown

    365 S.E.2d 865 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988)   Cited 9 times

    State v. Strickman, 253 Ga. 287, 288 ( 319 S.E.2d 864) (1984). See also State v. Gardner, 254 Ga. 264 ( 328 S.E.2d 546) (1985); State v. McCard, 173 Ga. App. 504 ( 326 S.E.2d 586) (1985). In the present case, however, appellee's pre-trial motion did not seek the suppression of any evidence on the ground that it had been obtained in violation of law.