context: However, Daker ignores the fact that he already argued in his first appeal that the trial court erroneously unsealed the documents that were used in the presentence investigation. Since Daker already waived this issue by failing to identify the location of the relevant signed releases in the record of his first appeal, we cannot reconsider this issue now.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.parenthetical: error waived in prior appeal could not be addressed again in subsequent appeal
citation_a.sentence: See Willingham v. State, 241 Ga. App. 509 (1) (527 SE2d 232) (1999) (error waived in prior appeal could not be addressed again in subsequent appeal); see also Parker v. State, 229 Ga. App. 217, 218 (2) (493 SE2d 558) (1997) (when issue decided adversely to appellant in prior appeal, relitigation is precluded by res judicata).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 229 Ga. App. 217, 218
citation_b.parenthetical: when issue decided adversely to appellant in prior appeal, relitigation is precluded by res judicata
citation_b.sentence: See Willingham v. State, 241 Ga. App. 509 (1) (527 SE2d 232) (1999) (error waived in prior appeal could not be addressed again in subsequent appeal); see also Parker v. State, 229 Ga. App. 217, 218 (2) (493 SE2d 558) (1997) (when issue decided adversely to appellant in prior appeal, relitigation is precluded by res judicata).