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

O.C.G.A. § 15-6-28 (2019)

Law assistants and court administrators for judicial circuits; circuits having institutions for carrying out death sentences

✓ 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) The chief judge of each judicial circuit is authorized to employ either one law assistant or one court administrator for the circuit. Each judicial circuit is authorized to employ additional law assistants and administrators subject to availability of funds. (b) The chief judge of a judicial circuit wherein there is located an institution of the state designated by the Department of Corrections for carrying out the death sentence is authorized to employ a law assistant

whose primary duty shall be to assist the court in handling appeals made by individuals awaiting execution. (c) All personnel actions involving law assistants and court administrators employed pursuant to this Code section shall be in accordance with the provisions of Code Section 15-6-27. (d) Funds for salaries, expenses, and other remuneration for law assistants and court administrators employed pursuant to this Code section shall be paid from state funds appropriated or otherwise available for the operation of the superior courts.

History

Ga. L. 1980, p. 455, §§ 1, 2; Ga. L. 1985, p. 1279, § 1; Ga. L. 1986, p. 1488, § 1; Ga. L. 1993, p. 1402, § 19; Ga. L. 1994, p. 97, § 15; Ga. L. 1997, p. 1335, § 4; Ga. L. 1999, p. 736, § 1.

Annotations

Cross references. - Reimbursement to counties for habeas corpus costs, § 9-14-53. Death penalty generally, § 17-10-30 et seq.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Delegation of power to excuse jurors. - If the clerk delegated the duty of handling excusals to the court administrator and the chief deputy clerk, the court administrator (who excused some veniremen) did not have such power if the court administrator was not authorized ex-

pressly by the chief judge to excuse jurors, but there was no such disregard of the essential and substantial provisions of the statute as would vitiate the arrays. Hendrick v. State, 257 Ga. 17, 354 S.E.2d 433 (1987).

RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. - Effect of Law Clerk’s Conflict of Interest, 49 A.L.R.7th Art. 3

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1987–1998 · leading case: Sallie v. State, 499 S.E.2d 897 (Ga. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sallie v. State, 499 S.E.2d 897 (Ga. 1998). · cites it 6× “OCGA § 15-6-28 (a), the statute which authorized English’s position, provides that the chief judge of each judicial circuit can hire one law clerk or court administrator for the circuit.”
Hendrick v. State, 354 S.E.2d 433 (Ga. 1987). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 15-6-28 as follows: “[the] court administrator shall perform such duties and services as shall be prescribed by the judge.”
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.