Bartlett v. Caldwell, 452 S.E.2d 744 (Ga. 1995). · Go Syfert
Search
Bartlett v. Caldwell, 452 S.E.2d 744 (Ga. 1995). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
13 citation events (13 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: JOHN CLARK v. PETER J. SKANDALAKIS (gactapp, 2025-09-26)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) JOHN CLARK v. PETER J. SKANDALAKIS
Ga. Ct. App. · 2025 · confidence medium
Bartlett v. Caldwell, 265 Ga. 52, 53 ( 452 SE2d 744 ) (1995) (citation omitted); Adams v. Ga. Dept. of Corrections, 274 Ga. 461, 461-462 ( 553 SE2d 798 ) (2001) (rejecting petitioners’ arguments that, as citizens, petitioners had standing to seek mandamus, in part, because the constitutional duty to refrain from cruel and unusual punishment was owed only to those who were charged with or convicted of a capital crime, which community of potential litigants petitioners were not members).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Mayo v. Head
Ga. · 2006 · confidence medium
See Dubose v. Hodges, 280 Ga. 152, 152 ( 625 SE2d 745 ) (2006) (mandamus will not lie to compel special prosecutor to re-present a criminal case to a grand jury); State v. Wooten, 273 Ga. 529, 531 ( 543 SE2d 721 ) (2001) (“[i]n the district attorney’s role as administrator of justice, he or she has broad discretion in making decisions prior to trial about who to prosecute”); State v. Hanson, 249 Ga. 739, 742-743 ( 295 SE2d 297 ) (1982) (“[f|rom the beginning of our criminal justice system prosecutors have exercised the power of prosecutorial discretion in deciding which defendants to p…
discussed Cited "see" Cardinale v. City of Atlanta (2×)
Ga. · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
See Bartlett v. Caldwell, 265 Ga. 52 ( 452 SE2d 744 ) (1995); Roberts v. State, 280 Ga. App. 672, 674 ( 634 SE2d 790 ) (2006).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Dekalb County Republican Party, Inc. v. Brad Raffensperger, in His Official Capacity as the Secretary of State of the State of Georgia (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2025 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See SCV, 315 Ga. at 67 (2) (d) (ii); cf. Barrow v. Raffensperger, 380 Ga. 660 , 667 (2) (b) ( 842 SE2d 884 ) (2020) (the Secretary’s duty to conduct a legally required election is owed to voters, and thus, a voter has standing to pursue mandamus); see also Bartlett v. Caldwell, 265 Ga. 52, 53 ( 452 SE2d 744 ) (1995) (although a citizen may have an interest in crime being prosecuted, that citizen “does not have a judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or nonprosecution of another,” and thus, lacks standing to pursue mandamus relief against a prosecuting authority when that citi…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
BARTLETT
v.
CALDWELL
S94A1239.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Jan 17, 1995.
452 S.E.2d 744
Jerel H. Bartlett, pro se., Johnnie L. Caldwell, District Attorney, Michael J. Bowers, Attorney General, Daryl A. Robinson, John C. Jones, Senior Assistant Attorneys General, Hendrix & Smith, Newton M. Galloway, for ap-pellees.
Hunt.
Cited by 6 opinions  |  Published
Hunt, Chief Justice.

Jerel Herschel Bartlett asked the magistrate to issue an arrest warrant against Deborah Ann Horning for false swearing in connection with an affidavit she submitted in their ongoing divorce action. The magistrate denied the warrant application. Subsequently, Bartlett filed a petition for writ of mandamus against the magistrate and the district attorney, who had indicated that he did not prosecute false swearing cases, seeking to compel Horning’s arrest for false swearing. The superior court denied the writ of mandamus. Bartlett appeals, and we affirm.

A magistrate has discretion to determine whether or not probable cause exists for the issuance of an arrest warrant, and mandamus will not lie to compel the magistrate to perform this discretionary act unless a gross abuse of discretion has been shown. Chisholm v. Cofer, 264 Ga. 512 (448 SE2d 369) (1994). The magistrate court exercised its discretion in refusing to issue the warrant and that refusal was not an abuse of discretion. Id.

Further, Bartlett does not have standing to challenge the district attorney’s decision not to prosecute.

A citizen does not have a judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or nonprosecution of another and, hence, lacks standing to contest the prosecuting authority’s policies when the citizen is neither prosecuted nor threatened with prosecution. [Cit.]

Scanlon v. State Bar of Ga., 264 Ga. 251, 253 (443 SE2d 830) (1994). Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.