...choosing." Preston v. State, 257 Ga. 42, 44 (354 SE2d 135) (1987). Accord Kesler v. State, 249 Ga. 462 (291 SE2d 497) (1982); Bailey v. State, 240 Ga. 112, 114 (239 SE2d 521) (1977); McClure v. Hopper, 234 Ga. 45, 49 (214 SE2d 503) (1975). See OCGA § 17-12-44....

...idence digitally are not expressly authorized. They are not the type of expenses that can be expected to be incurred ordinarily in a trial in superior court. It follows that the trial court erred in ordering Fulton County to pay these costs. 3. OCGA § 17-12-44, which was enacted in 1979, provided: This article expressly recognizes the inherent power of the court to appoint counsel to represent indigent defendants and to order compensation and reimbursement from county funds in individual cases as the proper administration of justice may require....

...Lowenstein, 252 Ga. 432, 433 (1) (314 SE2d 107) (1984). This power includes the ability to appoint counsel to represent indigent defendants, as was statutorily recognized in 1979 by the enactment of the Georgia Indigent Defense Act, OCGA §§ 17-12-30; 17-12-44....

...d, the public defender's office swamped, and the state's treasury depleted, every lawyer in the county [Knox] has been ordered to represent the poor at no charge."); Drecksel, The Crisis In Indigent Defense, 44 Ark. L. Rev. 363, 408 (1991). [4] OCGA § 17-12-44 provides: This article expressly recognizes the inherent power of the court to appoint counsel to represent indigent defendants and to order compensation and reimbursement from county funds in individual cases as the proper administration of justice may require....

...peal. The Council appeals pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-34(a)(2). The Council contends that the August 24, 2007 order is void because the County is responsible for payment of Attorneys' fees and expenses incurred during Palmer's retrial. Under former OCGA § 17-12-44, which was enacted in 1979, a court was empowered to order a county to pay for legal services for an indigent defendant in a capital felony case....

...and expenses authorized by order of the trial court to $10,000. Appellants appeal. There is no question that the superior court has the authority to arrange for the provision of legal services to an indigent defendant in a capital felony case. OCGA § 17-12-44....

...e in this case was not set pursuant to the provisions of that act. The inherent power of the court to appoint counsel to represent indigent defendants and to order compensation and reimbursement from county funds was statutorily recognized by OCGA § 17-12-44. (Ga. L. 1979, p. 367, § 15.) With the enactment of OCGA § 17-12-44, it would seem that OCGA § 17-12-60 has been, in effect, superseded....

...Willis, 201 Ga. App. 723 (411 SE2d 771) (1991) avail Adams, as that case was also a Federal civil rights case and the attorney fee award therein involved the application of OCGA § 9-15-14, which is not in issue in this case. Contrary to Adams’s argument, OCGA § 17-12-44 is expressly limited in scope to criminal proceedings4 and thus does not authorize reimbursement of appointed counsel in this civil proceeding....

...r which the trial court denied finding, inter alia, that the motion was untimely and the affidavits legally insufficient. We decline the opportunity presented here to adopt the position proposed by the concurring opinion in McCorkle, supra. OCGA § 17-12-44 states that “[t]his article expressly recognizes the inherent power of the court to appoint counsel to represent indigent defendants and to order compensation and reimbursement from county funds in individual cases as the proper administration of justice may require.” (Emphasis supplied.) OCGA § 17-12-44 comes within Article 2 of Chapter 12, Volume 17, known as the “Georgia Indigent Defense Act,” OCGA § 17-12-30, which was promulgated to provide the constitutional guarantees of the right to counsel and equal access to the courts “t...

...He argued that he applied for appointment as counsel under what is now *290 OCGA §§ 17-12-60; 17-12-61 because these were the only two sections applicable to capital cases and that he is entitled to be compensated under the more liberal provisions of OCGA § 17-12-5 (b). Finally, he insisted that since under OCGA § 17-12-44 the court has inherent power to order adequate compensation for the representation of indigents, he should not be limited to the $250 plus $500 for expenses provided by OCGA §§ 17-12-60; 17-12-61....

...The guidelines are clear as to the requisite procedure for approving fee requests of attorneys assisting in a panel program and those guidelines provide for a procedure that is independent of the county except to the extent of the county’s representatives on the tripartite committee. Appellant is correct that OCGA § 17-12-44 does recognize “the inherent authority of the court to appoint counsel to represent indigent defendants and to order compensation and reimbursement from county funds in individual cases as the proper administration of justice may requir...

...s to which he was entitled under the contract established with Judge Faircloth, and that Pittman, who was compensated at the rate of $100 per hour, has failed to show that he did not receive a reasonable sum for his services, OCGA §§ 17-12-60 (a); 17-12-44....