O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 15-12-100 (2019)

Procedure for impaneling special grand jury; number of jurors; foreperson; powers of jury

✓ O.C.G.A. (archive.org 2024 item): print volumes of 2004-2024, per-volume vintage; older volumes partly replaced by 2019 Release 73 text; no 2025 or 2026 Acts
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) The chief judge of the superior court of any county to which this part applies, on his or her own motion, on motion or petition of the district attorney, or on petition of any elected public official of the county or of a municipality lying wholly or partially within the county, may request the judges of the superior court of the county to impanel a special grand jury for the purpose of investigating any alleged violation of the laws of this state or any other matter subject to investigation by grand juries as provided by law.

(b) Until July 1, 2012, the chief judge of the superior court of the county shall submit the question of impaneling a special grand jury to the judges of the superior court of the county and, if a majority of the total number of the judges vote in favor of impaneling a special grand jury, the members of a special grand jury shall be drawn in the manner prescribed by Code Section 15-12-62. On and after July 1, 2012, the chief judge of the superior court of the county shall submit the question of impaneling a special grand jury to the judges of the superior court of the county and, if a majority of the total number of the judges vote in favor of impaneling a special grand jury, the members of a special grand jury shall be chosen in the manner prescribed by Code Section 15-12-62.1. Any special grand jury shall consist of not less than 16 nor more than 23 persons. The foreperson of any special grand jury shall be selected in the manner prescribed by Code Section 15-12-67.

(c) While conducting any investigation authorized by this part, investigative grand juries may compel evidence and subpoena witnesses; may inspect records, documents, correspondence, and books of any department, agency, board, bureau, commission, institution, or authority of the state or any of its political subdivisions; and may require the production of records, documents, correspondence, and books of any person, firm, or corporation which relate directly or indirectly to the subject of the investigation being conducted by the investigative grand jury.

History

(Code 1933, § 59-602a, enacted by Ga. L. 1974, p. 270, § 1; Ga. L. 2011, p. 59, § 1-37/HB 415; Ga. L. 2016, p. 186, § 4/HB 941.)

Annotations

The 2016 amendment, effective July 1, 2016, in subsection (a), inserted "or her", and inserted ", on motion or petition of the district attorney," near the middle.

Editor's notes. - Ga. L. 2011, p. 59, § 1-1/HB 415, not codified by the General Assembly, provides: "This Act shall be known and may be cited as the 'Jury Composition Reform Act of 2011.'"

Law reviews. - For annual survey on criminal law, see 64 Mercer L. Rev. 83 (2012).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Oath requirement inapplicable to civil investigations. - O.C.G.A. § 15-12-68 is irrelevant to civil investigations conducted pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 15-12-71 and/or O.C.G.A. § 15-12-100 et seq. State v. Bartel, 223 Ga. App. 696, 479 S.E.2d 4 (1996).

No particular oath is required for witnesses in civil investigations; thus, it was error to dismiss a perjury indictment on the basis of a deficient oath since the oath administered named the grand jury, specified the type of investigation, named the subject entities being investigated, and contained accepted language regarding the promise and obligation to testify truthfully. State v. Bartel, 223 Ga. App. 696, 479 S.E.2d 4 (1996).

Special purpose grand jury not authorized to return criminal indictment. - Trial court erred in holding that a special purpose grand jury was authorized to return a criminal indictment against a county commissioner because there was no language under O.C.G.A. § 15-12-100(a) giving a special purpose grand jury the power to return a criminal indictment; if the legislature had intended to empower a special purpose grand jury with the same powers and duties as a regular grand jury as provided in O.C.G.A. § 15-12-71, the legislature could have provided to that effect in § 15-12-100 or made reference to the powers enumerated in O.C.G.A. § 15-12-71. Kenerly v. State, 311 Ga. App. 190, 715 S.E.2d 688 (2011), cert. denied, 2012 Ga. LEXIS 265 (Ga. 2012).

Impact of special grand jury's overreach. - Although the defendant established a violation of the impaneling order, which fixed the scope of the special purpose grand jury's investigative powers to county corruption, but not city, and it also constituted a violation of O.C.G.A. §§ 15-12-71 and 15-12-102, neither dismissal of the indictment nor suppression of the evidence was the proper remedy for the grand jury's overreach as no violation of the defendant's constitutional rights nor a structural defect in the grand jury process occurred. State v. Lampl, 296 Ga. 892, 770 S.E.2d 629 (2015).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1996–2024 · leading case: Kenerly v. State, 715 S.E.2d 688 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kenerly v. State, 715 S.E.2d 688 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 30× “The record reveals that the Gwinnett County District Attorney petitioned the judges of the Gwinnett County Superior Court to impanel a special purpose grand jury, pursuant to OCGA § 15-12-100, *191 for the purpose of investigating the acquisition of real property by the Gwinnett…”
State v. Bartel, 479 S.E.2d 4 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 18× “Though the record in this case is not entirely clear regarding the authority under which the grand jury in the underlying matter was proceeding, it appears that there is no dispute that the civil investigation of the Floyd County Hospital Authority by the special purpose grand…”
State v. Lampl, 770 S.E.2d 629 (Ga. 2015). · cites it 4× “In March 2011, the Chief Judge of the Clayton Judicial Circuit, at the request of the Clayton County District Attorney, issued an order pursuant to OCGA § 15-12-100 authorizing the impaneling of a special purpose grand jury to investigate certain alleged public corruption.”
Ellis v. State, 794 S.E.2d 601 (Ga. 2016). · cites it 4× “SeeOCGA § 15-12-100 (a) (superior court may impanel special purpose grand jury “for the purpose of investigating any alleged violation of the laws of this state or any other matter subject to investigation by grand juries as provided by law”).”
State of Georgia v. Jeffrey Clark, 119 F.4th 1304 (11th Cir. 2024). · cites it 2× “” See O.C.G.A. § 15-12-100. In January 2023, after issuing its final report, the special purpose grand jury was dis- solved.”
State v. Lampl, 750 S.E.2d 685 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 6× “The grand jury’s indictment stemmed from an earlier investigation by a Clayton County special purpose grand jury which had been impaneled pursuant to OCGA § 15-12-100 for the purpose of investigating public corruption and various crimes allegedly committed by currently or…”
State v. John James Lampl, No. A13A1071 (Ga. Ct. App. Oct. 28, 2013). · cites it 6× “The grand jury’s indictment stemmed from an earlier investigation by a Clayton County special purpose grand jury which had been impaneled pursuant to OCGA § 15-12-100 for the purpose of investigating public corruption and various crimes allegedly committed by currently or…”
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.