Whether the lower court erred in its application of the legal standard for [issue being raised]

No question identified. : REVIEW QUESTIONS | 1) In 2019, the issue arose whether a court | could dismiss for want of prosecution at a time after the statute of limitations had | run. The state's argument was that the effect of such a dismissal would be "with prejudice," because they would be barred i | , from re-bringing the case. In State v. ° Banks, 348 Ga. App. 876 (2019), and State i v. Walker, 356 Ga. App. 170 (2020), the Georgia Court of Appeals sided with the | State and held that the trial courts could : not dismiss for want of prosecution after | the statute of limitations had run. Georgia courts have long exercised the 1! inherent authority to dismiss criminal cases for want of prosecution. This typically occurs when the state has not | met its burden to proceed for a trial call or has simply sat on a case for an | extended period of time. It has also been , used when the State has not met its | statutory discovery obligations in a manner which delays the trial of the case. | | In other words, it is a method of the judge : exercising control of the court's docket. ' | i ( | | Be , j : | REVIEW QUESTIONS | 2) Dion Starr v. Leory Baca, Los Angeles County Sheriff Case Number: 09-55233. | The court in Starr v. Baca, 652 F.3d 1202, “ 1212-16 (9th Cir. 2011) identified and | addressed conflicts in the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on the pleading | requirements applicable to civil actions. The court held that whatever the differences between the Supreme Court | cases, there were two principles common to all: First, to be entitled to the | presumption of truth, allegations in a , complaint or counterclaim may not | simply recite the elements of a cause of ) action but must contain sufficient | allegations of underlying facts to give fair notice and to enable the opposing | party to defend itself effectively. Second, the factual allegations that are taken as true must plausibly suggest an i entitlement to relief, such that it is not unfair to require the opposing party to be | subjected to the expense of discovery and continued litigation. Starr v. Baca, 652 | F.3d 1202, 1216 (9th Cir. 2011). Y | i i 1