2020 Georgia Code
Title 9 - Civil Practice
Chapter 14 - Habeas Corpus
Article 2 - Procedure for Persons Under Sentence of State Court of Record

- For article, "Federalism in Current Perspective," see 1 Ga. L. Rev. 586 (1967). For article discussing Georgia's habeas corpus statutes in light of federal courts' requirements of exhaustion of state remedies prior to entertaining a habeas petition, see 9 Ga. St. B.J. 29 (1972). For article, "A New Role for an Ancient Writ: Post-Conviction Habeas Corpus Relief in Georgia," see 8 Ga. L. Rev. 313 (1974). For article, "Providing Legal Services to Prisoners," see 8 Ga. L. Rev. 363 (1974). For article examining the background and passage of this article and suggesting several possible revisions, see 9 Ga. L. Rev. 13 (1974). For article discussing developments in Georgia criminal law in 1976 to 1977, see 29 Mercer L. Rev. 55 (1977). For article discussing history of post-conviction habeas corpus relief in this state, see 12 Ga. L. Rev. 249 (1978). For article discussing this state's long arm statute, prejudgment attachment, and habeas corpus, with respect to judicial developments in practice and procedure in the Fifth Circuit, see 30 Mercer L. Rev. 925 (1979). For note surveying Georgia protection of the constitutional rights of criminal defendants through habeas corpus proceedings, see 16 Mercer L. Rev. 281 (1964). For note, "Discretionary Appointment of Counsel at Post-Conviction Proceedings: An Unconstitutional Barrier to Effective Post-Conviction Relief," see 8 Ga. L. Rev. 434 (1974). For note on 1995 amendments and enactments of sections in this article, see 12 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 18 (1995).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Editor's notes.

- For cases concerning the general provisions as to habeas corpus, see the annotations following Article 1 of this chapter.

- Ga. L. 1967, p. 835 is not unconstitutional as violating Ga. Const. 1945, Art. I, Sec. I, Para. IV (see now Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. I, Para. XII) as denying the right to prosecute one's cause. Reed v. Hopper, 235 Ga. 298, 219 S.E.2d 409 (1975).

Ga. L. 1967, p. 835 does not violate Ga. Const. 1945, Art. I, Sec. I, Para. IV (see now Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. I, Para. XV), providing that the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended. Reed v. Hopper, 235 Ga. 298, 219 S.E.2d 409 (1975).

- This state is not constitutionally required to afford prisoners either direct appeals from criminal convictions or a procedure for petitioning for a writ of habeas corpus. Gibson v. Jackson, 443 F. Supp. 239 (M.D. Ga. 1977), vacated on other grounds, 578 F.2d 1045 (5th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1119, 99 S. Ct. 1028, 59 L. Ed. 2d 79 (1979).

Ga. L. 1967, p. 835 provides an adequate post-conviction remedy to a prisoner seeking relief upon a claim arising from substantial denial of rights guaranteed by the federal and state Constitutions or by the laws of the state including denial of the right of appeal or of effective assistance of counsel on appeal. Neal v. State, 232 Ga. 96, 205 S.E.2d 284 (1974).

- Except that it commits the power to the court having territorial jurisdiction over the place of confinement, rather than vesting jurisdiction in the original sentencing court, Ga. L. 1967, p. 835 is remarkably like 28 U.S.C., § 2255. Peters v. Rutledge, 397 F.2d 731 (5th Cir. 1968).

- Ga. L. 1967, p. 835 deals only with habeas corpus cases when the prisoner is being restrained by virtue of a sentence of a state court of record. Shelton v. Grimes, 224 Ga. 451, 162 S.E.2d 426 (1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 1089, 89 S. Ct. 853, 21 L. Ed. 2d 782, rehearing denied, 394 U.S. 967, 89 S. Ct. 1301, 22 L. Ed. 2d 569 (1969).

- Civil Practice Act applies to habeas corpus proceedings insofar as questions arise therein regarding the sufficiency of pleadings, the admissibility of evidence under the petition as drawn, amendments, and those other elements of pleading and practice enumerated in Ga. L. 1968, p. 1104, § 12 (see now O.C.G.A. § 9-11-81). Johnson v. Caldwell, 229 Ga. 548, 192 S.E.2d 900 (1972).

Legislature intended, in enacting the 1968 amendment to Ga. L. 1968, p. 1104, § 12 (see now O.C.G.A. § 9-11-81), to repeal pro tanto the provisions of Ga. L. 1967, p. 835 insofar as it prescribed any different rules governing the sufficiency of pleadings, amendments, and what evidence would be admissible in support of a claim of illegal imprisonment, and intended that thereafter the Civil Procedure Act (see now O.C.G.A. Ch. 11, T. 9) should apply. Johnson v. Caldwell, 229 Ga. 548, 192 S.E.2d 900 (1972).

Habeas corpus is not an available remedy for recovery of a fine. Bunn v. Burden, 237 Ga. 439, 228 S.E.2d 830 (1976).

- Petitioner in habeas corpus attacking illegality of the petitioner's detention pursuant to sentencing for a crime is not entitled to appointed counsel. Reese v. Ault, 229 Ga. 694, 194 S.E.2d 79 (1972). (See also annotations to Art. 1 of this chapter.)

- Although Ga. L. 1967, p. 835 is technical and difficult of application, it is a procedure that prisoners of this state must utilize and complete before the prisoners can petition in a United States District Court for a writ of habeas corpus. Gibson v. Jackson, 443 F. Supp. 239 (M.D. Ga. 1977), vacated on other grounds, 578 F.2d 1045 (5th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1119, 99 S. Ct. 1028, 59 L. Ed. 2d 79 (1979). But see Davis v. Smith, 430 F.2d 1256 (5th Cir. 1970), wherein federal court declined to require petitioner to appeal denial of habeas petition by superior court to Supreme Court.

- One cannot state a federal claim for habeas relief by alleging that the state habeas court failed to properly apply state law. Stewart v. Ricketts, 451 F. Supp. 911 (M.D. Ga. 1978).

Cited in Ramirez v. State, 223 Ga. 815, 158 S.E.2d 238 (1967); McGarrah v. Dutton, 381 F.2d 161 (5th Cir. 1967); Tolever v. Smith, 224 Ga. 270, 161 S.E.2d 266 (1968); Henderson v. Dutton, 397 F.2d 375 (5th Cir. 1968); Rearden v. Smith, 403 F.2d 773 (5th Cir. 1968); Picklesimer v. Smith, 405 F.2d 186 (5th Cir. 1968); Montos v. Smith, 406 F.2d 1243 (5th Cir. 1969); Elkins v. Kelley, 410 F.2d 734 (5th Cir. 1969); O'Neal v. Smith, 413 F.2d 269 (5th Cir. 1969); Poss v. Smith, 227 Ga. 43, 178 S.E.2d 859 (1970); Moore v. Dutton, 432 F.2d 1281 (5th Cir. 1970); Johnson v. Smith, 449 F.2d 127 (5th Cir. 1971); Sneed v. Caldwell, 229 Ga. 507, 192 S.E.2d 263 (1972); Sims v. State, 230 Ga. 589, 198 S.E.2d 298 (1973); Whitlock v. State, 230 Ga. 700, 198 S.E.2d 865 (1973); Mosley v. Smith, 470 F.2d 1320 (5th Cir. 1973); Farmer v. Caldwell, 476 F.2d 22 (5th Cir. 1973); Riggins v. Stynchcombe, 231 Ga. 589, 203 S.E.2d 208 (1974); Ardister v. Hopper, 500 F.2d 229 (5th Cir. 1974); McClure v. Hopper, 234 Ga. 45, 214 S.E.2d 503 (1975); Fuller v. Ricketts, 234 Ga. 104, 214 S.E.2d 541 (1975); Samuels v. Hopper, 234 Ga. 246, 215 S.E.2d 250 (1975); Crowell v. State, 234 Ga. 313, 215 S.E.2d 685 (1975); Justice v. State Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 234 Ga. 749, 218 S.E.2d 45 (1975); Mason v. Balcom, 531 F.2d 717 (5th Cir. 1976); Dixon v. Hopper, 407 F. Supp. 58 (M.D. Ga. 1976); Lumpkin v. Ricketts, 551 F.2d 680 (5th Cir. 1977); Chenault v. Stynchcombe, 581 F.2d 444 (5th Cir. 1978).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Article inapplicable to habeas of one committed for mental illness.

- Ga. L. 1967, p. 835 would be inapplicable to habeas corpus proceedings under former Code 1933, § 88-517, as it concerned itself with the exclusive procedures for suing out a writ by one restrained by virtue of a "sentence" imposed by a state court of record. 1967 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 67-320.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

- Power to grant writ of habeas corpus pending appeal from conviction, 52 A.L.R. 876.

Discharge on habeas corpus in federal court from custody under process of state court for acts done under federal authority, 65 A.L.R. 733.

Discharge on habeas corpus after conviction as affecting claim or plea of former jeopardy, 97 A.L.R. 160.