Madigan v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided November 18, 1981

Court of Appeals of Georgia · decided 1981-11-18

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently September 1984

5 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“In my opinion, we should clarify the status of Blackmon, supra, that is, to the extent that it conflicts with Tanner, supra, it will not be followed.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 163 Ga. App. 657 - Luck v. State

Relies on 160 Ga. App. 266 - Tanner v. State · 159 Ga. App. 244 - Garner v. State · 158 Ga. App. 665 - Blackmon v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1981-11-18

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Deen, Presiding Judge,

¶1concurring specially.

¶2In Tanner v. State, 160 Ga. App. 266 (1981), we declined to follow Division 2 of Smith v. State, 158 Ga. App. 663 (281 SE2d 631) (1981), and likewise we modified Garner v. State, 159 Ga. App. 244 (282 SE2d 909), (1981). Blackmon v. State, 158 Ga. App. 665 (281 SE2d 634) (1981) quotes and relies in part on Smith, supra, as to sanctions for nonproduction of scientific reports: “Moreover, even assuming the admission of the testimony to be error because of the state’s technical noncompliance with Code Ann. § 27-1303, appellant has demonstrated no harm thereby.” (Emphasis supplied.) In my opinion, we should clarify the status of Blackmon, supra, that is, to the extent that it conflicts with Tanner, supra, it will not be followed.