explaining extent to which Georgia’s courts look to federal evidence jurisprudence in applying our new Evidence Code
How later courts described this case
- explaining extent to which Georgia’s courts look to federal evidence jurisprudence in applying our new Evidence Code
- remand necessary when this Court cannot discern whether trial court applied appropriate test in excluding other-acts evidence and thus cannot undertake a meaningful review of that order
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
MCFADDEN, Judge,
concurring fully and specially.
I concur fully in the majority opinion. I write separately to lament the ease with which this spectacle — an unauthorized criminal trial that the prosecutor was compelled to boycott leading to ineffective acquittals that an appellate court must unwind — could have been avoided.
When this case was called for trial, the state told the trial court that it had appealed her suppression order. The trial court erroneously replied that the state’s notice of appeal was ineffective. At noon that same day, the state filed an emergency motion with this court. Less than four-and-a-half hours later, we granted the emergency motion and stayed the trial. But by that time, the purported trial had taken place and the purported acquittals had been entered.