O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 17-12-4 (2019)

Authority of council; annual audit

✓ 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 council: (1) Shall be a legal entity; (2) Shall have perpetual existence; (3) May contract; (4) May own property; (5) May accept funds, grants, and gifts from any public or private source, which shall be used to defray the expenses incident to implementing its purposes; (6) May adopt and use an official seal; and (7) May establish a principal office.

(b) The council shall establish auditing procedures as may be required in connection with the handling of public funds. The state auditor shall be authorized and directed to make an annual audit of the transactions of the council and to make a complete report of the same to the General Assembly. The annual audit shall disclose all moneys received by the council and all expenditures made by the council by revenue source, including all programs and special projects itemized in the General Appropriations Act. The annual audit shall include an itemization by revenue source of encumbered and reserved money. Revenue sources shall include each county governing authority’s expenditures which are made pursuant to Code Sections 17-12-31 and 17-12-32 and city or county expenditures which are made pursuant to subsection (d) of Code Section 17-12-23. The state auditor shall also make an audit of the affairs of the council at any time when requested to do so by a majority of the council or by the Governor or General Assembly. (c) The council may not provide compensation from its funds to any administrative or clerical personnel employed by the council if the personnel are then receiving retirement compensation from any retirement or pension fund created by Title 47 to provide compensation for past services as a judicial officer, prosecuting attorney, indigent defense attorney, court officer, or law enforcement officer except for county or municipal retirement funds.

History

Code 1981, § 17-12-4, enacted by Ga. L. 2003, p. 191, § 1; Ga. L.

2008, p. 846, § 17/HB 1245; Ga. L. 2011, p. 91, § 2/HB 238.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 14 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1985–2021 · leading case: Butler v. State, 401 S.E.2d 43 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Butler v. State, 401 S.E.2d 43 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 16× “(a) Defendant first contends the trial court erroneously failed to appoint counsel, although he was indigent and had requested one, thereby depriving him of effective assistance of counsel in violation of Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. I, Par. XIV, OCGA § 17-12-4, and…”

Duke v. State, 856 S.E.2d 250 (Ga. 2021). · cites it 8× “See OCGA § 17-12-4 (a) (3) (“The council . . .”

Lawal v. State, 412 S.E.2d 864 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 12× “However, it has been held that "the provisions of OCGA § 17-12-4 (a) and Rule 1.1 of the Guidelines for Local Indigent Defense Programs ( 246 Ga.”

Lewis v. State, 335 S.E.2d 560 (Ga. 1985). · cites it 2× “” In essence, she claims that the procedure followed in appointing her attorney deviated from a systematic selection process mandated by OCGA § 17-12-4, the due process clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and Art.”

Smith v. State, 440 S.E.2d 44 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 4× “Therefore, at this point, some inquiry by the court was required to determine whether or not Smith was indigent under OCGA § 17-12-4 (a). Lawal, supra; Lowrance, supra; Butler v.”

Odum v. State, 641 S.E.2d 279 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “See former OCGA § 17-12-4 et seq. (2002). Following the passage of the IDA, however, public defender offices were established in each judicial circuit of the State.”

Schlau v. State, 582 S.E.2d 243 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “*305 The Georgia Criminal Justice Act defines an “indigent person” as one “who is unable, without undue hardship, to employ the legal services of an attorney or to defray the necessary expenses of legal representation.”

Greenhill v. State, 404 S.E.2d 577 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 17-12-4 et seq. We find no merit in appellant’s contention.”

Flanagan v. State, 462 S.E.2d 469 (Ga. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “We have repeatedly held that while the court must provide for representation of an indigent criminal defendant, see OCGA § 17-12-4, it is not obligated to appoint counsel for a defendant, such as Flanagan, 1 who is not indigent.”

State v. Hatcher, 448 S.E.2d 698 (Ga. 1994). · cites it 2× “See also OCGA § 17-12-4 (requiring courts to provide for the representation of indigent persons in criminal proceedings).”

Bynum v. State, 658 S.E.2d 196 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “See former OCGA § 17-12-4 et seq. (2002). Following the passage of the IDA, however, public defender offices were established in each judicial circuit of the State.”

Lowrance v. State, 359 S.E.2d 196 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “The policy stated by the trial court violates the provisions of OCGA § 17-12-4 (a) and Rule 1.1 of the Guidelines for Local Indigent Defense Programs ( 246 Ga.”

Show all 14 citing cases →

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.