Court Opinion

ID: 9570684
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:25:10.956939+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:13:37.404064
License: Public Domain

Mikell, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur fully in Divisions 1, 3 and 4.1 respectfully dissent from Division 2, because I believe that the analysis of Burtts v. State, 211 Ga. App. 840 (440 SE2d 727) (1994), is valid for cases arising prior to July 1, 2000, the effective date of the changes made by OCGA § 40-2-8 (b) (2) (B) (i). I agree with the majority to the extent that Burtts should not be followed for cases arising after July 1, 2000.
I am authorized to state that Chief Judge Blackburn and Presiding Judge Smith join in this dissent.
*641Decided March 29, 2002.
Peevy & Lancaster, Donn M. Peevy, Lucas O. Harsh, for appellant.
Thurhert E, Baker, Attorney General, Michael E. Hobbs, Deputy Attorney General, David S. McLaughlin, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.