Jones v. State
Georgia Court of Appeals
375 S.E.2d 648 (1988)
- Written by Monica Rottermann , JD
Facts
Jones (defendant) appealed his child-cruelty convictions, arguing that the trial court erred in Jones’s competency trial by preventing certain questions on cross-examination of the state’s expert witness, Dr. Grigsby. Jones argued that the judge incorrectly overruled Jones’s objection to Dr. Grigsby’s qualifications as an expert witness, as the judge improperly relied on the judge’s prior findings that Jones was an expert in other cases. Additionally, Jones argued that the judge erred in preventing Jones’s attorney from exploring any bias Dr. Grigsby might have had related to Dr. Grigsby’s employment for the state. The judge found Dr. Grigsby to be unbiased—in spite of receiving payment from the state—because the judge himself was also paid by the state and was unbiased.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Beasley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
