O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 15-12-160 (2019)

Required panel of jurors in felony trial; summoning prospective jurors when necessary

✓ 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

Reserved. Repealed by Ga. L. 2011, p. 59, § 1-55/HB 415, effective July 1, 2012.

Annotations

Editor’s notes. - This Code section was based on Ga. L. 1855-56, p. 229, § 3; Code 1863, § 4564; Ga. L. 1865-66, p. 235, § 1; Code 1868, § 4584; Ga. L. 1869, p. 139, §§ 9, 10; Ga. L. 1871-72, p. 42, § 1; Code 1873, §§ 3935, 4678; Ga. L. 1880-81, p. 120, § 1; Code 1882, §§ 3935, 4678; Ga. L. 1889, p. 118, § 1; Penal Code 1895,

§§ 858, 859, 970; Penal Code 1910, §§ 862, 863, 996; Code 1933, § 59-801; Ga. L. 1937, p. 466, § 2; Ga. L. 1973, p. 286, § 1; Ga. L. 1992, p. 1981, § 1; Ga. L. 2005, p. 20, § 5/HB 170; Ga. L. 2011, p. 59, § 1-55/HB 415, and was repealed on its own terms, effective July 1, 2012.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases, 1984–2018 · leading case: Willis v. State, 820 S.E.2d 640 (Ga. 2018).
Willis v. State, 820 S.E.2d 640 (Ga. 2018). · cites it 10× “2d 712 (1986), including its construction of OCGA § 15-12-160 (now OCGA § 15-12-160.1 ), to accept the seemingly-unqualified notion that "an accused is entitled to a full panel of qualified jurors (that is, jurors not subject to being excused for cause) to which to direct his…”
Cannon v. State, 552 S.E.2d 922 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 6× “586, 589 (2) ( 506 SE2d 406 ) (1998) (“Under OCGA § 15-12-160, a defendant in a non-death penalty felony trial is entitled to a panel of 30 jurors, of which at least 12 jurors must be qualified to serve.”
Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 (1992). · cites it 2× “Ga. Code Ann. § 15-12-160 (1990). [2] When a defendant is indicted for an offense carrying a penalty of four or more years, Georgia law provides that he may "peremptorily challenge 20 of the jurors impaneled to try him.”
Kirkland v. State, 560 S.E.2d 6 (Ga. 2002). · cites it 2× “See also OCGA § 15-12-160; Harris v. State, 255 Ga.”
Jackson v. State, 654 S.E.2d 137 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “A party is entitled to this as a matter of right; but, conversely, he is entitled to no more.”
Young v. State, 721 S.E.2d 855 (Ga. 2012). · cites it 2× “Finally, “[t]he jury panels which were put upon the accused contained [101] veniremen, substantially more than required by OCGA § 15-12-160.” Hall v. State, 254 Ga.”
Harris v. State, 339 S.E.2d 712 (Ga. 1986). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 15-12-160. Here, the trial court should have stricken the state patrolman for cause upon request under Hutcheson, supra.”
Thomason v. State, 637 S.E.2d 639 (Ga. 2006). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 15-12-160 etseq. Therefore,itcannot be said that the trial court erred by denying Thomason’s request to do so.”
Bass v. State, 358 S.E.2d 837 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “OCGA § 15-12-160.... The defendant's failure to exhaust his peremptory strikes before the twelfth juror was impaneled does not render the error harmless.”
Walker v. Hagins, 722 S.E.2d 725 (Ga. 2012). · cites it 2× “Finally, “[t]he jury panels which were put upon the accused contained [115] veniremen, substantially more than required by OCGA § 15-12-160.” Hall v. State, 254 Ga.”
Nelson v. State, 629 S.E.2d 410 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 15-12-160; Shuler v. State, 213 Ga.”
Smith v. State, 506 S.E.2d 406 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “Under OCGA § 15-12-160, a defendant in a non-death penalty felony trial is entitled to a panel of 30 jurors, of which at least 12 jurors must be qualified to serve.”
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.