Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Thaxton v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided May 2, 1990No. S90A0255Published

1ConcurrenceHunt, Justice

I write separately because I cannot agree with the majority’s interpretation of the hearing requirement under Superior Court Rule 31.3. Concerning the interplay between Rules 31.2 and 31.3, the Court of Appeals in Grogan v. State, 192 Ga. App. 234, 236 (384 SE2d 441) (1989) held:

Thus, the Rules construed in harmony contemplate that “generally” the mandated hearing will appropriately be held before trial, for obvious reasons of fairness and economy. We conclude any review of the trial court’s exercise of discretion must be analyzed in that light and with that object in view. .

This is…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Grogan v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1989
  2. Flournoy v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1988

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

Powered by the Exa API