O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 15-18-7 (2019)

Representation of state in criminal cases removed to federal court

✓ 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

Whenever any criminal prosecution commenced by this state against any person for a violation of the laws of this state is removed to a United States district court pursuant to Chapter 89 of Title 28 of the United States Code, it shall be the duty of the district attorney of the circuit from which the case was removed, in association with the Attorney General, to appear for the state as the prosecuting officers of the state. The expenses incurred by the district attorney as actual costs in the prosecution of any such case shall be paid by the state out of such funds as may be provided for the operation of the superior courts or as otherwise may be provided by law.

History

(Ga. L. 1882-83, p. 98, §§ 1, 2; Code 1933, § 24-2909; Ga. L. 1977, p. 1257, § 5.)

Annotations

U.S. Code. - Chapter 89, T. 28 of the United States Code, referred to in this Code section, is codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1441 et seq.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Cited in McClendon v. May, 37 F. Supp. 2d 1371 (S.D. Ga. 1999).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d. - 63C Am. Jur. 2d, Prosecuting Attorneys, § 23 et seq.

C.J.S. - 27 C.J.S., District and Prosecuting Attorneys, § 32 et seq.

ALR. - Necessity that condition, as regards jurisdictional amount, of right of removal of case from state to federal court, shall have existed at time of commencement of action, 107 A.L.R. 1115.

Time for filing petition for removal of action from state to federal courts as affected by extension of time for pleading, 108 A.L.R. 966.

Separable controversy for purpose of removal from state to federal court as arising out of action in which nonresident master or principal is joined as defendant with a resident servant or agent, 110 A.L.R. 188.

Anticipatory relief in federal courts against state criminal prosecutions growing out of civil rights activities, 8 A.L.R.3d 301.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1988–1988 · leading case: Owens v. Fulton Cnty., 690 F. Supp. 1024 (N.D. Ga. 1988).
Owens v. Fulton Cnty., 690 F. Supp. 1024 (N.D. Ga. 1988). “, § 15-18-7. In addition to these differences in state law, the Georgia district attorney generally has more attributes of a state official than of a county official.”
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.