O.C.G.A. § 24-13-62 (2019)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code 1933, § 38-1505 and former O.C.G.A. § 24-10-62 are included in the annotations for this Code section. Some showing of need was contemplated. Brand v. State, 154 Ga. App. 781, 270 S.E.2d 206, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2386 (1980) (decided under former Code 1933, § 38-1505). Dismissal of inmate’s mandamus action was error. - Trial court erred when the court dismissed an inmate’s

mandamus action pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-6-20, wherein the inmate sought additional jail time credit, upon the inmate’s failure to appear at a hearing in the matter, as the trial court failed to rule on the inmate’s motion for habeas corpus ad testificandum under former O.C.G.A. § 2410-62 and, accordingly, the inmate had no ability to appear in court on the hearing date. Rozar v. Donald, 280 Ga. 111, 622 S.E.2d 850, 2005 Ga. LEXIS 862 (2005) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-1062).

RESEARCH REFERENCES C.J.S. 98 C.J.S. (Rev), Witnesses, § 107. ALR. Constitutionality of statute restoring competency of convicts as witnesses, 63 A.L.R. 982.

Right of accused to have his witnesses free from handcuffs, manacles, shackles, or the like, 75 A.L.R.2d 762.

ARTICLE 4 UNIFORM ACT TO SECURE THE ATTENDANCE OF WITNESSES FROM WITHOUT THE STATE Cross references. Securing attendance of witnesses at grand jury or trial proceedings generally, § 17-7-190 et seq. Procedure for testimony of out of state witnesses in guardianship or conservatorship proceeding, § 29-11-6.

Law reviews. For article on the 2011 enactment of this article, see 28 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 1 (2011).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former O.C.G.A. Art. 5, Ch. 10, T. 24 are included in the annotations for this Code section. Under Georgia’s new Evidence Code, unless a fact-finding proceeding involves one of the 12 situations enumerated in O.C.G.A. § 24-1-2(c) and (d), the rules of evidence fully apply; similarity to one or more of the enumerated situations is insufficient to limit the applicability of the evidence rules. Parker v. State, 296 Ga. 586, 769 S.E.2d 329, 2015 Ga. LEXIS 133 (2015). Provisions of § 17-7-192 not applicable to procedure to secure witnesses. - Provisions of O.C.G.A. § 17-7192, prohibiting a continuance due to the absence of witnesses when the accused failed to use the means provided in the former statutory provisions, which dealt with the accused’s right to obtain subpoenas for such witnesses as the accused may deem material for the accused’s defense, did not apply to the procedure set forth in

former O.C.G.A. Art. 5, Ch. 10, T. 24 (see now O.C.G.A. Art. 4, Ch. 13, T. 24). Farrell v. State, 160 Ga. App. 321, 287 S.E.2d 318, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 3055 (1981) (decided under former O.C.G.A. Art. 5, Ch. 10, T. 24). Defendant lacked standing to complain of any procedural irregularities involved in obtaining a witness whom the state procured by means of former O.C.G.A. Art. 5, Ch. 10, T. 24 (see now O.C.G.A. Art. 4, Ch. 13, T. 24). Moon v. State, 258 Ga. 748, 375 S.E.2d 442, 1988 Ga. LEXIS 521 (1988), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 982, 111 S. Ct. 1638, 113 L. Ed. 2d 733, 1991 U.S. LEXIS 2295 (1991) (decided under former O.C.G.A. Art. 5, Ch. 10, T. 24). Application of rules of evidence. - Under O.C.G.A. § 24-1-2(b), the rules of evidence apply to a proceeding for issuance of a material witness certificate under the out-of-state witness act unless one of the exceptions in § 24-1-2(c) or (d) applies. Parker v. State, 296 Ga. 586, 769 S.E.2d 329, 2015 Ga. LEXIS 133 (2015).

RESEARCH REFERENCES U.L.A. Uniform Act to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses from Without a State in Criminal Proceedings (U.L.A.). Uniform Rendition of Prisoners as Witnesses in Criminal Proceedings Act (U.L.A.). ALR. Availability under uniform act to secure the attendance of witnesses from without

a state in criminal proceedings of subpoena duces tecum, 7 A.L.R.4th 836. Sufficiency of evidence to support or require finding that out-of-state witness in criminal case is “material witness” justifying certificate to secure attendance under Uniform Act to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses from Without a State in Criminal Proceedings, 12 A.L.R.4th 742.

T.24, C.13, A.4 SECURING ATTENDANCE OF WITNESSES Sufficiency of evidence to support or require finding that in-state witness in criminal case is “material and necessary” justifying issuance of summons directing

attendance of witness under Uniform Act to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses from Without a State in Criminal Proceedings, 12 A.L.R.4th 771.