State v. Armstead
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Shulman, Judge.
This is an interlpcutory appeal from the trial court’s denial of the state’s motion to compel defendant to produce handwriting exemplars. We affirm.
1. In considering whether the state may compel an individual to produce handwriting exemplars, the following constitutional and statutory law is relevant. Art. I, Sec. I, Par. XIII of the Constitution of 1976 (Code Ann. § 2-113) states: "No person shall be compelled to give testimony tending in any manner to criminate himself.” Code Ann. § 38-416 provides: "No person, who shall be charged in any criminal proceeding with the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Gilbert v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Creamer v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1972
- Hyde v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1943
- Reeves v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1976
- Bradford v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
3Cited by31 opinions
- State v. ThorntonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1984
- Traylor v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1992
- Ingram v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1984
- Olevik v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2017
- Ward v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1992
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.