State v. Lively

2 Citing cases

  1. State v. Giddens

    280 Ga. App. 586 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 19 times

    Even when he moved for dismissal of the indictment by asserting denial of speedy trial and prejudice, Giddens did not ask for a trial. State v. Lively, 155 Ga. App. 402, 406 ( 270 SE2d 812) (1980). On these facts, we find no basis for the trial court's conclusion that Giddens showed prejudice to his defense sufficient to weigh this Barker factor in his favor.

  2. Buford v. State

    291 S.E.2d 256 (Ga. Ct. App. 1982)   Cited 8 times
    Explaining that "[d]elivery of marijuana and distribution of marijuana are both distinct violations of [the prior version of Ga. Code Ann. ยง 16-13-30(j)(1)] . . . and may be committed exclusive of each other"

    In the second place, appellant has not shown that these documents would have been produced under the Freedom of Information Act. And finally, we do not intend to establish a new obstacle to speedy trial (see State v. Lively, 155 Ga. App. 402 ( 270 S.E.2d 812) or a new constitutional mandate of discovery, by permitting reliance on Freedom of Information requests to postpone trials. Any material evidence obtainable under the Freedom of Information Act is insured under existing criminal discovery methods and the guaranteed right to process.