O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 15-11-522 (2019)

Contents of petition

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A petition alleging delinquency shall be verified and may be on information and belief. It shall set forth plainly and with particularity:

(1) The facts which bring a child within the jurisdiction of the court, with a statement that it is in the best interests of such child and the public that the proceeding be brought and that such child is in need of supervision, treatment, or rehabilitation, as the case may be;

(2) The name, age, and residence address of such child on whose behalf such petition is brought;

(3) The name and residence address of such child’s parent, guardian, or legal custodian; or, if such child’s parent, guardian, or legal custodian does not reside or cannot be found within this state or if such place of residence address is unknown, the name of any of such child’s known adult relative residing within the county or, if there is none, such child’s known adult relative residing nearest to the location of the court;

(4) If a child is in custody, the place of his or her detention and the time such child was taken into custody;

(5) If a child is being charged with a class A designated felony act or class B designated felony act; and

(6) Whether any of the information required by this Code section is unknown.

History

Code 1981, § 15-11-522, enacted by Ga. L. 2013, p. 294, § 1-1/HB 242.

Annotations

Law reviews. - For article discussing due process in juvenile court procedures in California and Georgia, in light of In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 87 S. Ct. 1428, 18 L. Ed.

2d 527 (1967), see 8 Ga. St. B. J. 9 (1971). For article, ‘‘Child Custody - Jurisdiction and Procedure,’’ see 35 Emory L. J. 291 (1986). For comment on grandparents’ visitation rights in Georgia, see 29 Emory L. J. 1083 (1980).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code 1933, § 24A-1603, pre-2000 Code Section 15-11-25 and pre-2014 Code Section 15-11-38.1, which were subsequently repealed but were succeeded by provisions

in this Code section, are included in the annotations for this Code section. See the Editor’s notes at the beginning of the chapter. Juvenile petition must satisfy ‘‘due process.’’ - Although a juvenile petition does not have to be drafted with the exac-

titude of a criminal accusation, the petition must satisfy ‘‘due process.’’ T.L.T. v. State, 133 Ga. App. 895, 212 S.E.2d 650 (1975) (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-1603). Since the state’s petition failed to set forth in ordinary and concise language the facts demonstrating the nature of the parent’s alleged failure to provide proper parental care or control, the parent lacked sufficient information to enable the parent to prepare a defense, and this amounted to a denial of due process. In re D.R.C., 191 Ga. App. 278, 381 S.E.2d 426 (1989) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-25). To meet constitutional requirement of due process the language of a juvenile petition must pass two tests: (1) the petition must contain sufficient factual details to inform the juvenile of the nature of the offense; and (2) the petition must provide data adequate to enable the accused to prepare a defense. T.L.T. v. State, 133 Ga. App. 895, 212 S.E.2d 650 (1975) (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-1603). Allege with particularity. - Due process requires that the petition alleging delinquency must set forth with specificity the alleged violation of law either in the language of the particular section, or so plainly that the nature of the offense charged may be easily understood by the child and the child’s parents or guardian. D.P. v. State, 129 Ga. App. 680, 200 S.E.2d 499 (1973) (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-1603). Petition filed alleging delinquency, deprivation, or unruliness must set forth alleged misconduct with particularity. A.C.G. v. State, 131 Ga. App. 156, 205 S.E.2d 435 (1974) (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-1603). Insufficient notice to juvenile of alleged offense. - If a juvenile is brought to trial on a petition alleging delinquency based on a violation of former Code 1933, § 26-1601 (see now O.C.G.A. § 16-7-1) but was adjudicated delinquent for violating former Code 1933, § 26-1806 (see now O.C.G.A. § 16-8-7), there was insufficient notice to the juvenile of the offense alleged to be the basis of the juvenile’s delinquency and the trial court must be reversed. D.P. v. State, 129 Ga. App. 680,

200 S.E.2d 499 (1973) (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-1603). Statement of custody irrelevant if jurisdiction otherwise exists. - If jurisdiction otherwise existed, such as if the action was brought in the county of the residence of both mother and son, then the requirement in paragraph (4) of former Code 1933, § 24A-1603 had no relevancy to the right of the trial court to handle the case. Sanchez v. Walker County Dep’t of Family & Children Servs., 138 Ga. App. 49, 225 S.E.2d 441, rev’d on other grounds, 237 Ga. 406, 229 S.E.2d 66 (1976) (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-1603). Assumption of jurisdiction linked to authorized petition. - An order for detention clearly did not meet the requirements of a petition filed pursuant to former Code 1933, § 24A-1603 (see now O.C.G.A. §§ 15-11-152, 15-11-280, 15-11-390, 15-11-420, 15-11-422, and 15-11-522) to commence proceedings under former Code 1933, § 24A-1601 (see now O.C.G.A. § 15-11-420), and the assumption of jurisdiction by the juvenile court is linked to the authorized petition. Hartley v. Clack, 239 Ga. 113, 236 S.E.2d 63 (1977) (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-1603). In a hearing on parental custody in a divorce action, the trial court erred in awarding custody of the parties’ minor children to the Department of Family and Children Services based upon findings that the children were deprived and the parents unfit because the mother had no notice that the superior court judge might award custody of the children to a third party based upon standards of deprivation. Watkins v. Watkins, 266 Ga. 269, 466 S.E.2d 860 (1996) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-25). Preparation and verification. - Because counsel for the Department of Children & Family Services stated to the court that counsel prepared the termination petition, that the petition was reviewed, verified, and then signed by counsel the next day, this was sufficient to comply with the requirements of former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-25 (see now O.C.G.A. §§ 15-11-152, 15-11-280, 15-11-390, 15-11-422, and 15-11-522). In re A.K.M.,

235 Ga. App. 853, 510 S.E.2d 611 (1998) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-25). Service by correctional officer upon incarcerated father. - Personal service of a summons and a petition of deprivation by a correctional officer upon an incarcerated father was sufficient as the service procedures in the Civil Practice Act, O.C.G.A. § 9-11-1 et seq., were not

adopted nor were binding on the juvenile court, and the correctional officer was acting under the direction of the court for the purposes of former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-39.1(c) (see now O.C.G.A. §§ 15-11-161, 15-11-282, 15-11-400, 15-11-424, and 15-11-531). In the Interest of A.J.M., 277 Ga. App. 646, 627 S.E.2d 399 (2006) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-38.1).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 47 Am. Jur. 2d, Juvenile Courts and Delinquent and Dependent Children, § 75 et seq. C.J.S. - 43 C.J.S., Infants, § 191 et seq.

U.L.A. - Uniform Juvenile Court Act (U.L.A.) § 21.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2015–2025 · leading case: In the Interest of J. H., a Child, 783 S.E.2d 367 (Ga. Ct. App. 2016).
In the Interest of J. H., a Child, 783 S.E.2d 367 (Ga. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 8× “OCGA § 15-11-522 (2015); former OCGA § 15-11-38.”
In the Interest of D. v. H., a Child, 779 S.E.2d 122 (Ga. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “A petition also shall be verified and shall set forth plainly and with particularity specific information set forth in OCGA § 15-11-522. In a prior proceeding, the juvenile court dismissed two delinquency petitions against D.”
In the Interest of E. T., a Child, 804 S.E.2d 725 (Ga. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “” OCGA § 15-11-522 (5); In the In terest of J.”
In the Interest of C. W., a Child, 815 S.E.2d 123 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “1428 , 18 LE2d 527 (1967) (the delinquency petition must "set forth the alleged misconduct with particularity" to satisfy due process); OCGA § 15-11-522 (The delinquency petition must set forth "plainly and with particularity: (1) the facts which bring a child within the…”
In the Interest of H. J. C., a Child, 771 S.E.2d 184 (Ga. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “, OCGA § 15-11-522 (l)-(3) (requiring a delinquency petition to state “plainly and with particularity [t]he facts which bring a child within the jurisdiction of the court,” including “a statement that [the proceeding is brought] in the best interests of such child,” the “name,…”
Kelli C. Rutherford in Her Offical Capacity v. Josh Moody (Ga. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 15× “” The parties then presented argument as to whether the delinquency hearing involved allegations of a “class A designated felony act” such that it was required to be open to the public under OCGA § 15-11-700 (b) (1) and whether the delinquency petition conformed to OCGA §…”
In the Interest of J.W., a Child (Ga. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 3× “”6 OCGA § 15-11-522 (5). Notice, to comply with due process requirements, must be given sufficiently in advance of scheduled court proceedings so that reasonable opportunity to prepare will be afforded, and it must “Set forth the alleged misconduct with particularity” .”
In the Interest Of: D. v. H. , a Child (Ga. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “A petition also shall be verified and shall set forth plainly and with particularity specific information set forth in OCGA § 15-11-522. In a prior proceeding, the juvenile court dismissed two delinquency petitions against D.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.