Burnham v. State
Supreme Court of Georgia
1ConcurrenceCarley, Justice
While I concur in Divisions 1 and 4 and in the judgment of the *135majority opinion, I cannot agree with Division 2 because, in my view, the evidence authorized the trial court’s determination that law enforcement officers did have probable cause to arrest appellant and his co-indictees after they exited the movie theater. As a result, I believe that it is unnecessary to reach the issues addressed in Divisions 3, 5 and 6.
The majority emphasizes the absence of an eyewitness who saw the trio at the scene of the crime, but gives little consideration to the fact that an eyewitness did see them…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Chambers v. MaroneySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Maggard v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1989
- Hall v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1991
- Davis v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1992
- Davis v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.