2020 Georgia Code
Title 9 - Civil Practice
Chapter 14 - Habeas Corpus


Cross references.

- Prohibition against suspension of writ of habeas corpus, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. I, Para. XV.

Provision that defendant shall not be discharged on writ of habeas corpus because of informality in commitment or in proceedings prior thereto, § 17-7-34.

Right to apply for writ of habeas corpus to test legality of arrest made pursuant to extradition proceedings, § 17-13-30.

Payment of fees from prisoner's inmate account upon filing of habeas corpus petition, § 42-12-7.1.

Law reviews.

- For article on habeas corpus, see 41 Emory L.J. 515 (1992). For article, "The Writ of Habeas Corpus in Georgia," see 12 Ga. St. B.J. 20 (2007). For note, "Protecting Access to the Great Writ: Equitable Tolling, Attorney Negligence, and AEDPA," see 51 Ga. L. Rev. 647 (2017). For note, "(I Can't Get No) Habeas Relief, Cause I Try, and I Try, and I Try, and I Try," see 70 Mercer L. Rev. 1135 (2019).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Law provides for two different kinds of habeas corpus: (1) by a person restrained or by someone in the person's behalf, in which case the only parties before the court are the person detained and the person detaining, and the only issue is the legality of such restraint, either under pretext of legal process or under no process or right of restraint; and (2) by one claiming right of custody against another holding custody, seeking not to release but to claim custody of the person detained, which covers not only cases involving detention of a wife or child but also what has been termed "habeas corpus ad prosequendum," which issues when necessary to remove a prisoner to another jurisdiction having the right to try the prisoner under a previous indictment or to imprison the prisoner under a previous sentence. Faughnan v. Ross, 197 Ga. 21, 28 S.E.2d 119 (1943).

No habeas corpus relitigation of issues decided on appeal.

- Absent change in facts or law, issues decided on appeal cannot be relitigated in habeas corpus proceedings. Gibson v. Ricketts, 244 Ga. 482, 260 S.E.2d 877 (1979), cert. denied, 445 U.S. 920, 100 S. Ct. 1285, 63 L. Ed. 2d 606 (1980).

Cited in Harris v. Whittle, 190 Ga. 850, 10 S.E.2d 926 (1940); Great Am. Indem. Co. v. Beverly, 150 F. Supp. 134 (M.D. Ga. 1956); Cooper v. Stephens, 214 Ga. 825, 108 S.E.2d 274 (1959); West v. Hatcher, 219 Ga. 540, 134 S.E.2d 603 (1964); Clarke v. Grimes, 374 F.2d 550 (5th Cir. 1967); Mobley v. Dutton, 380 F.2d 14 (5th Cir. 1967); Kerry v. Brown, 224 Ga. 200, 160 S.E.2d 832 (1968); Strauss v. Stynchcombe, 224 Ga. 859, 165 S.E.2d 302 (1968); Moore v. Dutton, 396 F.2d 782 (5th Cir. 1968); Crosby v. Smith, 404 F.2d 876 (5th Cir. 1968); Reid v. State, 119 Ga. App. 368, 166 S.E.2d 900 (1969); Beasley v. Lamb, 227 Ga. 266, 180 S.E.2d 240 (1971); Harris v. Hopper, 236 Ga. 389, 224 S.E.2d 1 (1976); Bryant v. Wigley, 246 Ga. 155, 269 S.E.2d 418 (1980); Brand v. State, 154 Ga. App. 781, 270 S.E.2d 206 (1980); Earp v. Boylan, 260 Ga. 112, 390 S.E.2d 577 (1990).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Pleading and Proving Ineffective Assistance of Counsel in a Federal Habeas Corpus Proceeding: A Primer, 88 POF3d 1.

Federal Habeas Corpus Practice, 20 Am. Jur. Trials 1.

Historical Aspects and Procedural Limitations of Habeas Corpus, 39 Am. Jur. Trials 157.

Habeas Corpus: Pretrial Rulings, 41 Am. Jur. Trials 349.

Disclaimer: These codes may not be the most recent version. Georgia may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.