2021 Georgia Code
Title 42 - Penal Institutions
Chapter 5 - Correctional Institutions of State and Counties
Article 3 - Conditions of Detention Generally
§ 42-5-51. Jurisdiction Over Certain Misdemeanor Offenders; Designation of Place of Confinement of Inmates; Reimbursement of County; Transfer of Inmates to Federal Authority

1. The department shall have no authority, jurisdiction, or responsibility with respect to misdemeanor offenders sentenced under paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of Code Section 17-10-3 to confinement in the county or other jail, county correctional institution, or such other places as counties may provide for maintenance of county inmates. The county wherein the sentence is imposed shall have the sole responsibility of executing the sentence and of providing for the care, maintenance, and upkeep of the inmate while serving such sentence; provided, however, that, where the sentencing judge certifies to the department that the county facilities of that county are inadequate for maintaining female inmates, any female inmate may be committed to the department to serve her sentence in a state correctional institution, as may be directed by the department; provided, further, that the delivery of the female inmates to the proper place of incarceration shall be at the expense of the county of conviction.
2. Where any person is convicted of any offense, misdemeanor, or felony and sentenced to serve time in any penal institution in this state other than as provided in subsection (a) of this Code section, he shall be committed to the custody of the commissioner who, with the approval of the board, shall designate the place of confinement where the sentence shall be served.
3. After proper documentation is received from the clerk of the court, the department shall have 15 days to transfer an inmate under sentence to the place of confinement. If the inmate is not transferred within the 15 days, the department shall reimburse the county, in a sum not less than $7.50 per day per inmate and in such an amount as may be appropriated for this purpose by the General Assembly, for the cost of the incarceration, commencing 15 days after proper documentation is received by the department from the clerk of the court; provided, however, that, subject to an appropriation of funds, local governing authorities that have entered into memorandums of understanding or agreement or that demonstrate continuous attempts to enter into memorandums of understanding or agreement with the federal government under Section 287(g) of the federal Immigration and Nationality Act shall receive an additional payment in the amount of 10 percent of the established rate paid for reimbursement for the confinement of state inmates in local confinement facilities. The reimbursement provisions of this Code section shall only apply to payment for the incarceration of felony inmates available for transfer to the department, except inmates under death sentence awaiting transfer after their initial trial, and shall not apply to inmates who were incarcerated under the custody of the commissioner at the time they were returned to the county jail for trial on additional charges or returned to the county jail for any other purposes, including for the purpose of a new trial.
4. Notwithstanding any language in the sentence as passed by the court, the commissioner may designate as a place of confinement any available, suitable, and appropriate state or county correctional institution in this state operated under the jurisdiction or supervision of the department. The commissioner shall also have sole authority to transfer inmates from one state or county correctional institution in this state to any other such institution operated by or under the jurisdiction or supervision of or approved by the board. Neither male nor female state inmates shall be assigned to serve in any manner in a county jail unless they are participating in a state sponsored project and have the approval of the commissioner and the sheriff or the jail administrator of the county. Furthermore, the commissioner may transfer to the Attorney General of the United States for confinement any inmate if it is determined that the custody, care, treatment, training, or rehabilitation of the inmate has not been adequate or in the best interest of the inmate or his fellow inmates. The commissioner is authorized to contract with the Attorney General of the United States for the custody, care, subsistence, housing, treatment, training, and rehabilitation of such inmates.

(Ga. L. 1956, p. 161, § 13; Ga. L. 1964, p. 489, § 2; Ga. L. 1968, p. 1399, § 1; Ga. L. 1972, p. 582, § 1; Ga. L. 1973, p. 1297, § 1; Ga. L. 1979, p. 376, § 1; Ga. L. 1981, p. 1434, § 1; Ga. L. 1982, p. 1364, § 2; Ga. L. 1984, p. 604, § 1; Ga. L. 1985, p. 149, § 42; Ga. L. 1985, p. 283, § 1; Ga. L. 2011, p. 794, § 14/HB 87.)

- Ga. L. 2011, p. 794, § 1/HB 87, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: "This Act shall be known and may be cited as the 'Illegal Immigration Reform and Enforcement Act of 2011.'"

Ga. L. 2011, p. 794, § 21/HB 87, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: "(a) If any provision or part of any provision of this Act or the application of the same is held invalid or unconstitutional, the invalidity shall not affect the other provisions or applications of this Act or any other part of this Act than can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end, the provisions of this Act are severable.

"(b) The terms of this Act regarding immigration shall be construed to have the meanings consistent with such terms under federal immigration law.

"(c) The provisions of this Act shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws governing immigration and civil rights."

Ga. L. 2011, p. 794, § 22/HB 87, not codified by the General Assembly, provides, in part, that the amendment of this Code section by that Act shall apply to offenses and violations occurring on or after July 1, 2011.

- For article surveying legislative and judicial developments in Georgia local government law for 1978-79, see 31 Mercer L. Rev. 155 (1979). For article on the 2011 amendment of this Code section, see 28 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 35 (2011).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, annotations decided under former Code 1933, § 77-313 and Ga. L. 1937, p. 758 are included in the annotations for this Code section.

Function of the prison commission (now Board of Corrections) is to enforce sentences that are lawfully imposed, and the question as to whether a court is acting within the court's jurisdiction in modifying a sentence is in nowise affected by this section. Gobles v. Hayes, 194 Ga. 297, 21 S.E.2d 624 (1942) (decided under former Code 1933, § 77-313).

Board of Corrections controls prison system and the Board's administrative decisions are final absent violation of rights enforceable in the courts; this enumeration of error is waived if the defendant admits that the trial court and the district attorney have kept their part of the agreement. Overby v. State, 150 Ga. App. 319, 257 S.E.2d 386 (1979).

- Because a county could sue the state agencies by challenging the constitutionality of O.C.G.A. §§ 42-9-49 and42-5-51(c) (regarding reimbursement of the detention costs of certain state inmates), and because the county did not dispute that the agencies complied with the sections, the trial court should have granted the agencies' motion for summary judgment. Ga. Dep't of Corr. v. Chatham County, 274 Ga. App. 865, 619 S.E.2d 373 (2005).

- Since the defendant was sentenced as a felon upon the defendant's plea of guilty to the felony of making terroristic threats and misdemeanor battery, the court did not have authority to sentence the defendant to a county jail and the county had no authority to calculate the defendant's jail time. Eubanks v. State, 229 Ga. App. 667, 494 S.E.2d 564 (1998).

- Defendant's dissatisfaction as to the defendant's incarceration in an institution other than the one recommended by the court does not render the defendant's guilty plea void, when there is no evidence that it constituted a part of the inducement to enter the plea. Overby v. State, 150 Ga. App. 319, 257 S.E.2d 386 (1979).

- When one guilty of a misdemeanor is sentenced to be "confined at labor at the State Penitentiary (Georgia State Prison) at Reidsville, Georgia, or such other place as the proper authority may direct," such portion of the sentence as seeks to designate the place of confinement, when no effort so to confine the prisoner is shown and since the director of the department of corrections (now commissioner of corrections) designates where most sentences are served, is mere surplusage, and, though technically not in the right form, is not such an irregularity as is hurtful to any right of liberty, or such a defect as makes the sentence void. Mathis v. Scott, 199 Ga. 743, 35 S.E.2d 285 (1945) (decided under Ga. L. 1937, p. 758).

Trial court cannot require the Department of Corrections to place a convicted felon in a particular facility; however, language in a sentence purporting to designate a place of confinement is mere surplusage and is not a defect that will render the sentence void. Stewart v. State, 285 Ga. App. 760, 647 S.E.2d 411 (2007).

- Superior court in this state has the power to order a habeas corpus petitioner under sentence of state court transferred from one penal institution to another, when this is necessary to grant the petitioner's constitutional right to meaningful access to the courts. To the extent that there exists a conflict between the statutory authority vested in the department to transfer prisoners from one correctional institute to another, and the authority vested in the superior court to enforce the Constitution, the former must yield to the latter. James v. Hight, 251 Ga. 563, 307 S.E.2d 660 (1983).

- Once a felony conviction was entered, and a defendant was sentenced to incarceration, the trial court lacked the authority to designate where that defendant must serve the incarceration, since this decision lies solely with the Department of Corrections under O.C.G.A. § 42-5-51(b). Florescu v. State, 276 Ga. App. 264, 623 S.E.2d 147 (2005).

Cited in Wilkes County v. Arrendale, 227 Ga. 289, 180 S.E.2d 548 (1971); In re Prisoners Awaiting Transf., 236 Ga. 516, 224 S.E.2d 905 (1976); McKenzey v. State, 140 Ga. App. 402, 231 S.E.2d 149 (1976); Wise v. Balkcom, 245 Ga. 126, 263 S.E.2d 158 (1980); Whiddon v. State, 160 Ga. App. 777, 287 S.E.2d 114 (1982); Hawk v. Georgia Dep't of Cors., 44 F.3d 965 (11th Cir. 1995); Manders v. Lee, 338 F.3d 1304 (11th Cir. 2003).

ANALYSIS

• General Consideration
• Custody of Prisoners
• Youthful Offenders
• Misdemeanants or Felons

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 60 Am. Jur. 2d, Penal and Correctional Institutions, §§ 7, 10, 12, 130, 134.

- 72 C.J.S., Prisons and Rights of Prisoners, §§ 17-25, 128, 129, 134.

- Validity of statute empowering administrative officials to transfer to penitentiary inmate of reformatory, 95 A.L.R. 1455.

Validity, construction, and application of statutory provision for reimbursement of state (or subdivision thereof) for expense of keeping prisoner, 139 A.L.R. 1028.

What felonies are inherently or foreseeably dangerous to human life for purposes of felony-murder doctrine, 50 A.L.R.3d 397.

Immunity of public officer from liability for injuries caused by negligently released individual, 5 A.L.R.4th 773.

Right of incarcerated mother to retain custody of infant in penal institution, 14 A.L.R.4th 748.

Validity, construction, and application of state statute requiring inmate to reimburse government for expense of incarceration, 13 A.L.R.5th 872.