Orkin v. State

236 S.E.2d 576, 239 Ga. 334, 1977 Ga. LEXIS 907
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided May 12, 1977·No. 32023·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinions

Per curiam.

We granted certiorari in Orkin v. State, 140 Ga. App. 651 (231 SE2d 481 (1976)), to determine whether the newly discovered evidence in this case requires suppression of wiretap evidence under the exclusionary rule contained in Code Ann. § 26-3004 (k).1

Argued April 11, 1977 Decided May 12, 1977 Rehearing denied June 7 and June 30, 1977. Hansell, Post, Brandon & Dorsey, Hugh M. Dorsey, Jr., Allen Post, David J. Bailey, Wesley R. Asinof, for appellants. Lewis R. Slaton, District Attorney, Carter Goode, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

Section 26-3004 (k) was construed by this court in Orkin v. State, 236 Ga. 176 (3) (223 SE2d 61) (1976). The present case involves the application of that Code section as construed by this court to an admittedly close set of facts.2 For the purposes of the writ of certiorari this does not involve a matter of gravity and importance. See Rule 36 (j), Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Georgia. Therefore, the writ of certiorari will be dismissed as improvidently granted.

Writ dismissed.

All the Justices concur, except Nichols, C.J., Undercofler, P.J., and Hill, J., who dissent.

Footnotes

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

Orkin v. State, 236 S.E.2d 576, 239 Ga. 334, 1977 Ga. LEXIS 907 (Ga. 1977).

236 S.E.2d 576 (Orkin v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Murray
687 S.E.2d 790 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2009)