Legal Opinion · Dissent

The State v. Baddeley.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 6, 2019No. A18A1623Published

1DissentMcFadden, Presiding Judge

The majority withholds the deference to which the trial court is entitled. And the majority declares, contrary to law, that a defendant whose consent was in fact secured by intimidation may not be found to have been intimidated if-in the opinion of the appellate court-a reasonable person would not have been intimidated. So I respectfully dissent.

About intimidation, appellee Baddeley testified at the suppression hearing that after initially declining the blood test, he changed his mind "when [the trooper] come into the room and he said if I didn't consent to the blood test, then, he was going…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Florida v. JimenoSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. The State v. ClayCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2016
  3. The State v. YoungCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2016
  4. CSEHY v. the STATE.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2018
  5. Emma Katherine Bergstorm v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API