Wiggins v. State
This text of 633 S.E.2d 381 (Wiggins v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In Wiggins v. State, 280 Ga. 268 (626 SE2d 118) (2006), the Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part Division 2 of our decision in Wiggins v. State, 272 Ga. App. 414 (612 SE2d 598) (2005), in which we affirmed the trial court’s judgment denying Wiggins’s motion to dismiss the indictment alleging violation of oath of office and false statements and writings because he was not afforded the rights of notice and the opportunity to appear before the grand jury pursuant to OCGA§§ 17-7-521 and 45-11-4.2 3****Wiggins, supra, 272 Ga. App. at 418. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to consider whether Wiggins was performing official duties when he committed the crimes and thus entitled to the protections of OCGA §§ 17-7-52 and 45-11-4. Wiggins, supra, 280 Ga. at 268. The Court affirmed the conviction for violation of oath of office, but reversed the conviction for false statements and writings.3 Id. at 270.
Because the Supreme Court only addressed one of the divisions in our opinion, we are required to (1) read the Supreme Court’s opinion within the context of the opinion being reversed; (2) to determine whether any portions of the opinion being reversed were neither addressed nor considered by the Supreme Court; and (3) enter an appropriate disposition with regard to those portions that are consistent with the issues addressed and considered by the [902]*902Supreme Court. Shadix v. Carroll County, 274 Ga. 560, 563-564 (554 SE2d 465) (2001). After so doing, we find that Division 1 and Divisions 3-8 of our opinion are consistent with and were not affected by the Supreme Court’s decision, and thus remain in effect.
Accordingly, that portion of Division 2 of our opinion reversed by the Supreme Court is vacated, the judgment of the Supreme Court is hereby made the judgment of this Court, and the judgment of the trial court convicting Wiggins for false statements and writings is vacated and the case remanded for proceedings consistent with the opinion of the Supreme Court.
Judgment affirmed in part, reversed in part, vacated in part and case remanded with direction.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
633 S.E.2d 381, 279 Ga. App. 901, 2006 Fulton County D. Rep. 2035, 2006 Ga. App. LEXIS 750, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wiggins-v-state-gactapp-2006.