Grant v. State
Grant v. the State
Opinion
Thompson, Justice.
We reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals in Grant v. State, 237 Ga. App. 892 ( 515 SE2d 872 ) (1999), because the State now concedes that the jury oath which is mandated by OCGA § 15-12-139 was never administered in this case.
1
It follows that Grant’s motion to set aside his conviction should have been granted and the case must be remanded for retrial. See Slaughter v. State, 100 Ga. 323 ( 28 SE 159 ) (1897).
Judgment reversed.
All the Justices concur.
*214 Decided March 13, 2000.
L. Elizabeth Lane, for appellant.
Charles H. Weston, District Attorney, Wayne G. Tillis, Howard Z. Simms, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellee.
1
We note that the State’s concession came after certiorari was granted and while the case was pending in this Court, and that the Court of Appeals was without benefit of that information when it rendered its opinion.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(“[T]he State now concedes that the jury oath which is mandated by OCGA § 15-12-139 was never administered in this case. It follows that [the defendant’s] motion to set aside his conviction should have been granted and the case must be remanded for retrial.” (footnote omitted))
Cited by 12 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.