Scott Key & Associates
  • Home
  • Practice Areas
    • Embedded Counsel
    • Appeals
    • Trial Litigation
  • Meet The Team
    • Scott Key
    • Kayci Timmons
    • Tori Bradley
    • Sam Kuperberg
  • Resources
    • Blogs
    • Podcasts
    • Upload Consultation Documents
    • FAQs
  • Contact
  • Call 678-610-6624
  • Menu Menu

Georgia’s New Evidence Code: How & Why We Changed

April 30, 2011/by J. Scott Key

Here are some reasons why this development is good.

Regularity

Less Vagueness (bent of mind, course of conduct, res gestae)

A modern evidence code that fits the kinds of evidence lawyers seek to admit

A playing field that, for a brief time, will reward the prepared (and that’s generally the defense)

As Professor Miller noted, Georgia has now gotten its evidence code up to speed and has largely adopted (98% of it) the Federal Rules of Evidence. I’m going to keep following the Law Prof Blog as this provision moves forward

Georgia is getting a much-needed change to its evidence code, and Colin Miller’s Evidence Prof Blog has the post I’ve been wanting to read. Professor Miller does two things really well in his post. First, he points out that Georgia is finally catching up with the rest of the nation as we become the 43rd State to enact an evidence code modeled after the Federal Rules of evidence. Secondly, he discusses why Georgia’s evidence rules were long overdue for an overhaul.

Why were we due for an overhaul? The current rules of evidence were enacted in 1863. Changes in the way we do court as well as little technological developments like the invention of the automobile, airplane, and the internet, have taken us int a different world than the world inhabited by the framers of the evidence code. Too often we were trying to match up the proverbial square peg and round hole. He cite to another of his posts, which demonstrates how antiquated the Federal Rules of Evidence are by reference to how to admit a computer printout under the Best Evidence Rule.

Why did it take so long? The move to change the rules began in 1986, and the legislation died “a thousand deaths in different committees” and faced “strong opposition from solicitors and prosecutors.” How did it get done this time? Professor Miller credits Representative Wendell Willard who pushed for adoption of the Federal Rules of Evidence in 2009. As the process began, he acknowledged the concerns of prosecutors. He convened a study committee, which discussed those concerns at length, highlighting the differences between the Georgia Rules of Evidence and the Federal Rules of Evidence. Eventually, the bill passed by an overwhelming margin, and we have a new evidence code on the way.

As Professor Miller noted, Georgia has now gotten its evidence code up to speed and has largely adopted (98% of it) the Federal Rules of Evidence. I’m going to keep following the Law Prof Blog as this provision moves forward.

Tags: EvidenceProf Blog, Federal Rules of Evidence, Georgia Rules of Evidence
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on X
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
0 0 J. Scott Key /wp-content/uploads/SK-Logo-Black-White.png J. Scott Key2011-04-30 10:30:102011-04-30 10:30:10Georgia’s New Evidence Code: How & Why We Changed
0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Related Resources

  • Living a Fulfilling Life (as a Lawyer)
  • Originalist Textualism 101 for Practitioners with Keith Blackwell
  • What I’ve Read, Heard, And Am Pondering This Week: June 1
  • Textualism As An Advocacy Tool
  • What I’ve Read, Heard, And Am Pondering This Week: March 7
  • Embracing the Legal Fundamentals with William Maselli

Archives

  • October 2024
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • October 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • July 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • July 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • August 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • September 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010

ADDRESS

199 W Jefferson St.
Madison, GA 30650

PHONE

678-610-6624

EMAIL

tori@scottkeylaw.com
© Scott Key & Associates, all rights reserved. | Website by Madison Studios  
  • LinkedIn
  • Youtube
Excellent Oral Argument on Lawyer DisqualificationThird Circuit: Mere Physical Proximity of Guns to Drugs Not Enough for Sentencing...
Scroll to top