Court Opinion

ID: 9586145
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 23:07:40.850623+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:24:21.407342
License: Public Domain

BEASLEY, Presiding Judge,
concurring specially.
I concur fully in Division 3 of the majority opinion, but not fully in Division 1, which I do not join although I concur in the ruling. As to Division 2, the court has already decided that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction on all counts, as this was ruled on in Division 2 of the prior opinion and is not affected by the Supreme Court’s reversal.1 It is res judicata.
With respect to Division 4,1 concur because we are bound by the earlier ruling when the case was first before us. Moreover, even upon reconsideration it is a proper disposition of the remaining enumerations of error.

 Hinson v. State, 229 Ga. App. 840, 842 (2) (494 SE2d 693) (1997).