Filter This View

  • Placanica v. State

    Publication Date: 2010-04-16
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Mikell, Charles B.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Melinda D. Taylor Spruell Taylor & Assocs. PC, Marietta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Barry E. Morgan, Solicitor General, Jessica K. Moss, Chief Assistant Solicitor General, Melissa C. Brickey and Jason B. Fincher, Assistant Solicitors General, Marietta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A10A0535

    The defendant continued making unwanted contact with a 17-year-old after she asked him to leave her

  • Hillis v. State

    Publication Date: 2010-04-16
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Mikell, Charles B.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Attilio J. Balbo Balbo & Gregg, Richmond Hill, for appellant.
    for defendant: John T. Durden Jr., District Attorney, and Ronald J. Poirier District Attorney's Office, Hinesville, for appellee.
    Case Number: A10A0285

    The trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to modify his sen because his reassignment to another facility was not an increase in his sen

  • Carter v. State

    Publication Date: 2010-04-09
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Mikell, Charles B.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Patricia G. Abbott Abbott Law Firm and Justin J. Wyatt, Marietta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Patrick H. Head, District Attorney, Dana J. Norman, Assistant District Attorney, Marietta, and Erman J. Tanjuatco, Assistant District Attorney, Jonesboro, for appellee.
    Case Number: A10A0426

    The trial court did not err in conducting the required test balancing the probative value of defendant's prior felony conviction for enticing a child for indecent purposes against its prejudicial ef

  • Varner v. State

    Publication Date: 2010-04-09
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Mikell, Charles B.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: J. Scott Key, McDonough, for appellant.
    for defendant: James D. McDade, District Attorney, James E. Barker and James A. Dooley, Assistant District Attorneys, Douglasville, for appellee.
    Case Number: A10A0222

    The trial court did not err in refusing to allow the defendant to enter a guilty plea, since the trial court did not force defendant to go to trial, but attempted to determine if defendant understoo

  • Myers v. State

    Publication Date: 2010-04-09
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Mikell, Charles B.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Steven L. Harris, Tyrone, for appellant.
    for defendant: Robert Stokely, Solicitor General, Natalie Ashman, Stephen J. Tuggle, Assistant Solicitors, Sandra N. Wisenbaker and Amy B. Godfrey Solicitor General's Office, Newnan, for appellee.
    Case Number: A10A0106

    The trial court properly charged the jury that driving under the influence and driving on the wrong side of the road are malum prohibitum crimes and, thus, the defendant's lack of intent was immat

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    A Letter from Your Client

    Authors: By Alex Geisler

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Patmon v. State

    Publication Date: 2010-04-09
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Mikell, Charles B.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Edward J. Chase III Public Defender's Office, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Paul L. Howard Jr., District Attorney, C. Lance Cross and Christopher M. Quinn, Assistant District Attorneys, Atlanta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A10A0626

    Double jeopardy did not bar the defendant's retrial, because the jury in his first trial acquitted him of charges involving the blunt trauma that killed one victim, which occurred subsequently and w

  • Disabato v. State

    Publication Date: 2010-04-09
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Mikell, Charles B.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Sharon L. Hopkins, Duluth, for appellant.
    for defendant: Daniel J. Porter, District Attorney, and Lisa A. Jones, Assistant District Attorney, Lawrenceville, for appellee.
    Case Number: A10A0457

    The state did not have to prove that the charged acts were nonconsensual, because the victim was under age 16 when the aggravated sexual battery occ

  • Myers v. State

    Publication Date: 2010-03-26
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Mikell, Charles B.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Steven L. Harris, Tyrone, for appellant.
    for defendant: Robert Stokely, Solicitor General, Natalie Ashman, Stephen J. Tuggle, Assistant Solicitors, Sandra N. Wisenbaker and Amy B. Godfrey Solicitor General's Office, Newnan, for appellee.
    Case Number: A10A0106

    The trial court properly charged the jury that driving under the influence and driving on the wrong side of the road are malum prohibitum crimes and, thus, the defendant's lack of intent was immat

  • Nelson v. State

    Publication Date: 2010-03-19
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Mikell, Charles B.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Herman M. Kilgore, Marietta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Garry T. Moss, District Attorney, and Sara A. Thompson, Assistant District Attorney, Canton, for appellee.
    Case Number: A10A0023

    The state failed to prove intent sufficient to support a forgery conviction, because defendant did not attempt to use a counterfeit $100 bill and his joke that he could not be charged criminally for

  • Partin v. State

    Publication Date: 2010-03-19
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Mikell, Charles B.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory W. Holt, Warner Robins, for appellant.
    for defendant: Fredric D. Bright, District Attorney, Milledgeville, and Keagan W. Goodrich District Attorney's Office, Gray, for appellee.
    Case Number: A10A0063

    The evidence supported the defendant's felony sentence because the victim, who had knowledge, experience and familiarity with the value of the property, testified that the stolen property was worth $650.