Can prosecutors really use rap lyrics against you in court? In Georgia, the answer is yes—and it raises serious concerns about fairness. Learn how criminal defense attorneys in Cobb, Bartow, and Paulding Counties fight to protect clients’ rights when prosecutors try to use music and speech as evidence.
Georgia’s gun possession laws are complex, and a conviction can have serious consequences. Learn what counts as illegal weapon possession, how prosecutors prove it in court, and the defenses available. If you’re facing charges in Cobb, Bartow, or Paulding County, knowing your rights could make all the difference.
Time limits can make or break a Georgia criminal case. Learn about arraignments, indictments, and statutes of limitations — and how a Cobb County defense lawyer can protect your rights.
Georgia law requires certain professionals and volunteers to report suspected child abuse — but the rules aren’t always clear. Learn the signs of abuse, your duty to report, and how a Marietta criminal defense lawyer can protect you if charged with failure to report in Cobb, Bartow, or Paulding County.
A recent Georgia Supreme Court case examined whether a school paraprofessional could be convicted under O.C.G.A. § 16-6-5.1, which defines sexual assault by school employees. The Court’s ruling clarified how the letter of the law applies versus the spirit of the law—a key distinction that shapes criminal prosecutions in Cherokee County and across Cobb, Bartow, and Paulding County, Georgia. Understanding how Georgia courts interpret these laws is essential for anyone facing criminal charges involving statutory interpretation or misconduct allegations.
The Georgia Court of Appeals upheld multiple Gwinnett County child molestation convictions, finding that the defendant’s attorney acted reasonably under Georgia’s Child Hearsay Statute.
The defendant claimed ineffective counsel, arguing his attorney failed to object to several witnesses who testified about the victim’s statements. The Appeals Court, however, explained that the statute permits certain out-of-court statements made before a child turns 16, and that objections would have had no merit.
Additionally, the Court supported the attorney’s strategic decision not to object to a nurse examiner’s testimony, noting that doing so could have alienated the jury. The ruling affirms the importance of Georgia’s hearsay laws and illustrates how defense strategy and admissible evidence intersect in sensitive criminal cases.
The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed a Gwinnett County murder case involving claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The defendant, convicted of malice murder, burglary, and multiple firearm charges, sought a new trial, alleging that his attorney’s performance had compromised his defense.
The Court found no evidence supporting the defendant’s claims. The justices ruled that the trial attorney’s strategic decisions, including his approach to witness testimony and handling of procedural issues, were reasonable and did not constitute ineffective representation.
The Georgia Court of Appeals clarified what it means to be a party to a crime, overturning an aggravated assault conviction in a Hart County case.
The defendant had been convicted of aggravated assault and three counts of felony obstruction after his grandfather fired a gun near police officers during the defendant’s arrest. The defendant appealed, arguing that he did not use or encourage the use of a weapon.
The Georgia Supreme Court has clarified what constitutes hearsay evidence in a criminal prosecution involving alleged gang and racketeering activities.
In a case before DeKalb Superior Court, prosecutors attempted to introduce a federal indictment charging unrelated defendants as evidence in a Georgia RICO and Street Gang Terrorism trial. The State argued that the indictment demonstrated motive and criminal intent under O.C.G.A. § 24-4-404(b).
The Georgia Court of Appeals reaffirmed that voluntary consent is key when determining whether DUI breathalyzer results are admissible in court.
In this case, Lisa Kendrick was stopped for driving under the influence in Cherokee County, where officers read her the implied consent notice before administering the test. Although Ms. Kendrick later claimed she was not fully informed of her Fourth Amendment rights, both the trial court and Appeals Court disagreed.
