Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 250 Ga. App. 376 - State v. Brown

250 Ga. App. 376 - State v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
October 2016
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 243 Ga. App. 868 - Dennard v. State · State v. Mulkey · Busch v. State · Conyers v. State · 199 Ga. App. 881 - Pullen v. State

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In construing a statute, our goal is to determine its legislative purpose. In this regard, a court must first focus on the statute’s text. In order to discern the meaning of the words of a statute, the reader must look at the context in which the statute was written, remembering at all times that the meaning of a sentence may be more than that of the separate words, as a melody is more than the notes. If the words of a statute, however, are plain and capable of having but one meaning, and do not produce any absurd, impractical, or contradictory results, then this Court is bound to follow the meaning of those words. If, on the other hand, the words of the statute are ambiguous, then this Court must construe the statute, keeping in mind the purpose of the statute and the old law, the evil, and the remedy. OCGA § 1-3-1 (a). Moreover, because [OCGA § 16-12-100.1] is a criminal statute, it must be strictly construed against the State.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.