Court Opinion

ID: 9564713
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:05:47.314185+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:18:37.718600
License: Public Domain

Benham, Chief Justice,
concurring in part and dissenting in part. Because of the reservations about victim impact evidence which I expressed in my dissent in Livingston v. State, 264 Ga. 402 (444 SE2d 748) (1994), and because the volume of victim impact evidence permitted by the trial court is greater and the evidence more inflammatory in this case than that which we permitted in Raulerson v. State, 268 Ga. 623 (13) (491 SE2d 791) (1997), I cannot agree with the conclusion in Division 1 of the majority opinion that there was no error in ruling victim impact evidence admissible in this case. Accordingly, since I concur with the holding in Division 2,1 must concur in part and dissent in part.
I am authorized to state that Justice Sears joins in this dissent.