Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 255 GAAPP 329 - Gearin v. State

Gearin v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
February 2009
most recently cited

7 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 227 Ga. App. 496 - Ney v. State · 247 Ga. App. 503 - Hardeman v. State · 232 Ga. App. 368 - Hutchinson v. State · 252 Ga. App. 465 - Howard v. State · 198 Ga. App. 380 - Hurst 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “When the issue of accident is raised, the burden is on the State to negate it or disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Any evidence as to misfortune or accident should be considered by you in connection with all the other evidence in the case. If, in doing so, you should entertain a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused, it would be your duty to acquit. On the other hand, should you believe from the evidence as a whole that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, then you may convict.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “touched her down there and she pointed to her vagina. April called D.G.'s doctor and was told to take D.G. to the hospital, which she did. Nurse June Hawkins, who prepared D.G. for her examination at the hospital, testified that when she helped D.G. to undress, she saw that D.G.'s panties were full of blood in the crotch. Dr. Carry Perry, who examined D.G., testified that she asked D.G. if various body parts hurt. The only body part that D.G. indicated was hurt was her bottom. Dr. Perry asked,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[A] reviewing court will not disturb a factual determination by the jury on intent unless it is contrary to the evidence and clearly erroneous. The intent with which an act is done is peculiarly a question of fact for determination by the jury and even when a finding that the accused had the intent to commit the crime charged is supported by evidence which is exceedingly weak and unsatisfactory the verdict will not be set aside on that ground. 1”
    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.