Legal Opinion · Dissent

Jackson v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided June 25, 2002No. A01A2509, A01A2524Published

1DissentEldridge, Judge

Because a merger issue under OCGA § 16-1-7 involves the possible imposition of a void sentence which may be reviewed at any time, I must respectfully dissent from Division 4 in Case No. A01A2509.

As held in Kinney v. State, 234 Ga. App. 5, 7 (2) (505 SE2d 553) (1998), one crime is included in another as a matter of fact if it is established by proof of the same or less than all of the facts used to prove the other. OCGA § 16-1-6 (1). A defendant may be tried for both offenses under such circumstances, but may not be convicted of both. OCGA § 16-1-7 (a) (l).26 “This right to be free of multiple…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Blackledge v. PerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. State v. EstevezSupreme Court of Georgia · 1974
  3. Williams v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1998
  4. Cannon v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2001
  5. Jarrett v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1995

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API