Holcomb v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Holcomb v. State

456 S.E.2d 587, 265 Ga. 395

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Holcomb v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 268 Ga. 100 →

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided May 8, 1995·No. S95A0391·Published

Opinion

Fletcher, Justice.

Quincey Jarrard Holcomb challenges the constitutionality of OCGA § 16-13-30 (d) under the United States and Georgia Constitutions. We held in Stephens v. State, 265 Ga. 356 (456 SE2d 560) (1995), that the life imprisonment provision as applied does not violate due process or equal protection. Since this appeal relies on the same statistical evidence considered in Stephens, we affirm.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Benham, P. J., and Sears, J., who concur in the judgment only.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Fletcher, Justice.

Quincey Jarrard Holcomb challenges the constitutionality of OCGA § 16-13-30 (d) under the United States and Georgia Constitutions. We held in Stephens v. State, 265 Ga. 356 (456 SE2d 560) (1995), that the life imprisonment provision as applied does not violate due process or equal protection. Since this appeal relies on the same statistical evidence considered in Stephens, we affirm.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Benham, P. J., and Sears, J., who concur in the judgment only.

Holcomb v. State, 456 S.E.2d 587, 265 Ga. 395 (Ga. 1995).

Pincite

456 S.E.2d 587 (Holcomb v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related