- Search with
- Parallel SearchEnter a full sentence between 5 and 30 words to find cases with conceptually similar sentences
- or
- Keyword SearchEnter keyword terms, accompanied by optional Boolean connectors
- ANDfraud AND damagesBoth terms in document
- ORcar OR automobileEither term in document
- NOTinfringement NOT patentTerm must not appear in document
- """due diligence"Exact match
- ()appeal AND (verdict OR judgment)Grouping terms
- *withdr*wSingle letter wildcard (withdraw, withdrew)
- !infring!Root expander (infringe, infringed, infringing)
- /ninvestor /5 diligenceTerms within n words of each other
- /sfees /s reasonableTerms within same sentence
- /padmissible /p warrantTerms within the same paragraph
Thomas v. State
261 Ga. App. 493 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003)5 Citing cases
Batten v. State
341 Ga. App. 332 (Ga. Ct. App. 2017) Cited 1 times 1 Legal AnalysesFurther, because of Batten’s erratic driving and the officer’s concerns about Batten’s potential impairment, the officer was authorized to stop him even in an unmarked vehicle. See Thomas v. State, 261 Ga.App. 493 , 497 (2) (b) (583 SE2d 207 ) (2003) (“[n]othing in [OCGA § 40-8-91] . . . invalidates traffic arrests, or investigatory stops, made in an unmarked vehicle!,]” and “an officer in an unmarked car may stop an erratic driver”); Sapp v. State, 297 Ga.App. 218 , 220-221 (1) (676 SE2d 867 ) (2009) (stop by an officer-in an unmarked vehicle was not unlawful where officer observed defendant’s vehicle cross the centerline); Carter, 215 Ga. App. at 648 . Additionally, the record indicates that an officer in a marked patrol car also effected the stop simultaneously with the unmarked vehicle.
State v. Simmons
283 Ga. App. 141 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006) Cited 18 timesHolding that police officer's observation of darkly tinted windows on defendant's vehicle justified traffic stop
(Footnotes omitted.) Thomas v. State, 261 Ga. App. 493, 496-497 ( 583 SE2d 207) (2003). Moreover, the trial court's reasoning has specifically been rejected in Ciak v. State, 278 Ga. 27 ( 597 SE2d 392) (2004).
Valle v. State
282 Ga. App. 223 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006) Cited 5 timesHolding that, under Randolph, a cotenant's refusal to permit a search renders the search invalid as to him, but does not render the search invalid as to a co-tenant who validly consents
And, in reaching our decision, we construe the evidence in a light favorable to upholding the lower court's judgment. See Thomas v. State, 261 Ga. App. 493, 496 (2) ( 583 SE2d 207) (2003). See id.
Kates v. State
609 S.E.2d 710 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005) Cited 7 timesThis was sufficient to support Kates's conviction for cocaine trafficking. See OCGA § 16-13-31 (a) (1); Thomas v. State, 261 Ga. App. 493, 495-496 (1) ( 583 SE2d 207) (2003) (passengers' testimony that driver directed one of them to hide cocaine was sufficient to support possession element necessary for trafficking conviction). (b) A person is guilty of misdemeanor obstruction when he "knowingly and willfully obstructs or hinders any law enforcement officer in the lawful discharge of his official duties."
Barrow v. State
269 Ga. App. 635 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004) Cited 11 timesRuling that a Batson challenge made after the jury has been impaneled and sworn is untimely
See Woodward v. State, 245 Ga.App. 409, 537 S.E.2d 791 (2000). Thomas v. State, 261 Ga.App. 493, 496(2), 583 S.E.2d 207 (2003). So viewed, the evidence establishes that, after Barrow passed Officer Freeman's patrol car, he braked so suddenly that the front of his car dipped, which made Officer Freeman suspect Barrow of driving under the influence.