O.C.G.A.
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.
(a) This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the ‘‘Georgia Indigent Defense Act of 2003.’’
(b) The Georgia Public Defender Council shall be an independent agency within the executive branch of state government.
(c) The council shall be responsible for assuring that adequate and effective legal representation is provided, independently of political considerations or private interests, to indigent persons who are entitled to representation under this chapter.
History
Code 1981, § 17-12-1, enacted by Ga. L. 2003, p. 191, § 1; Ga. L. 2007, p. 65, § 1/SB 139; Ga. L. 2015, p. 519, § 7-1/HB 328.
Annotations
Cross references. - Appointment of counsel for indigent defendants, Uniform Superior Court Rules, Rule 29.
U.S. Code. - Right to and assignment of counsel, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 44.
Law reviews. - For survey article on criminal law, see 59 Mercer L. Rev. 89 (2007). For survey article on legal ethics, see 59 Mercer L. Rev. 253 (2007).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Construction with former § 17-12-10. - Georgia Indigent Defense Act, in replacing former O.C.G.A. § 17-12-10(c), did not preclude a trial court from ordering restitution of attorney fees as part of the court’s general power to impose reasonable conditions of probation under O.C.G.A. § 42-8-35; thus, a defendant was properly ordered to reimburse the costs of the defendant’s legal representation and that aspect of the defendant’s sentence was not a nullity. State v. Pless, 282 Ga. 58, 646 S.E.2d 202 (2007).
Failure to exercise diligence in procuring counsel. - Trial court did not abuse the court’s discretion by proceeding with trial and refusing to delay the proceedings after concluding that the defendant did not exercise reasonable diligence in procuring counsel because the record showed that the defendant repeatedly claimed, over a period of three months, that the defendant was in the process of retaining counsel, and the defendant was advised on multiple occasions by the trial court to make a better effort to do so.
Hatcher v. State, 320 Ga. App. 366, 739 S.E.2d 805 (2013). Transcript costs for indigents. - It was error to hold that under O.C.G.A. § 17-12-34 of the Georgia Indigent Defense Act of 2003, the Georgia Public Defender Standards Council was required to pay for indigent defendants’ costs of tran-
scripts in criminal cases; under laws existing before the act, counties were required to pay for such transcripts, and the act does not repeal these laws by implication. Ga. Public Defender Stds. Council v. State of Ga., 284 Ga. App. 660, 644 S.E.2d 510 (2007).
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Placement of Georgia Public Defenders Standards Council in executive branch. - General Assembly was authorized to place the Georgia Public Defenders Standards Council (GPDSC) in the executive branch. A suit by GPDSC, whether by pro bono counsel or otherwise, against the state for so placing the GPDSC in the executive branch (or for any other reason) would be ultra vires and illegal. 2009 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 2009-2. Responsibilities of Director of Georgia Public Defender Standards Council. - Director of the Georgia Public
Defender Standards Council has broad authority and is responsible for the day to day operation of the agency. The Council’s limited responsibilities, to be carried out concurrently with the director, include setting standards, conducting audits, making financial disclosures, receiving funds, providing for legal education, reporting to the General Assembly, and providing procedures for the appointment of conflict council. 2009 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 2009-5.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
26
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 1987–2024 · leading case:
Duke v. State, 856 S.E.2d 250 (Ga. 2021).
Duke v. State, 856 S.E.2d 250 (Ga. 2021).
· cites it 16× “We granted interlocutory review in this case 1 to decide whether the trial court erred in determining that an indigent defendant in a criminal case who is represented by private, pro bono counsel has neither a statutory right under the Indigent Defense Act of 2003, OCGA §…”
Roberson v. State, 797 S.E.2d 104 (Ga. 2017).
· cites it 4× “That statute establishes the Georgia Public Defender Council, an independent executive branch agency, and makes the Council responsible for assuring “adequate and effective legal representation” for indigent persons. OCGA § 17-12-1 (c).”
Weis v. State, 694 S.E.2d 350 (Ga. 2010).
· cites it 4× “[6] OCGA § 17-12-1 et seq. [7] Ultimately, on the eve of trial, Weis was promised some funds, but not before he filed a petition for mandamus against Crawford.”
State v. Pless, 646 S.E.2d 202 (Ga. 2007).
· cites it 4× “The Court of Appeals set forth the rationale for its ruling, as follows: "the governing statute [former OCGA § 17-12-10(c) which expressly allowed a court to order reimbursement of attorney fees] was struck prior to trial and its replacement [Georgia Indigent Defense Act of…”
Sacandy v. Walther, 413 S.E.2d 727 (Ga. 1992).
· cites it 8× “The Program receives state funding and was established under the Georgia Criminal Justice Act, OCGA § 17-12-1 et seq., the Georgia Indigent Defense Act, OCGA § 17-12-30 et seq.”
Georgia Pub. Def. Standards Council v. State, 644 S.E.2d 510 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 8× “The Georgia Indigent Defense Act of 2003, OCGA § 17-12-1 et seq., made the Council an independent agency within the judicial branch of state government, OCGA § 17-12-1 (b), and made the *664 Council “responsible for assuring that adequate and effective legal representation is…”
Phan v. State, 723 S.E.2d 876 (Ga. 2012).
· cites it 2× “191, § 1; OCGA §§ 17-12-1 to 17-12-13. The capital defender’s division is responsible for providing indigent defense in death penalty cases in the State.”
Odum v. State, 641 S.E.2d 279 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 4× “Following the passage of the IDA, however, public defender offices were established in each judicial circuit of the State.”
Fulton Cnty. v. State, 651 S.E.2d 679 (Ga. 2007).
· cites it 2× “See OCGA§§ 17-12-1; 17-12-12. Judgment reversed.”
Georgia Pub. Def. Standards Council v. State, 675 S.E.2d 25 (Ga. 2009).
· cites it 4× “The Council was established by the Georgia Indigent Defense Act of 2003, OCGA § 17-12-1 et seq. (Act). That Act replaced the previous county-level piecemeal system with a statewide system which places on the Council the responsibility “for assuring that adequate and effective…”
Bynum v. State, 658 S.E.2d 196 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “” 1 Bynum moved the trial court to reconsider its order, and the court responded by again asserting that Bynum was requesting relief *637 that the trial court had no authority to grant, noting that the Georgia Indigent Defense Act of2003 (the “IDA”), OCGA§ 17-12-1 etseq., had…”
Hatcher v. State, 739 S.E.2d 805 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 2× “636, 637 ( 658 SE2d 196 ) (2008) (following the passage of the Georgia Indigent Defense Act of 2003, defendants apply directly to the public defender offices for indigent representation); see also OCGA §§ 17-12-1, 17-12-23 (b).”
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.