Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Where these conditions exist, the urban interstate system shall consist of the interstate highway constituting the closed loop or perimeter and all interstate highways or portions thereof located within such loop or perimeter, not including any portion of any interstate highway outside of the loop or perimeter.
(Ga. L. 1937-38, Ex. Sess., p. 558, § 7; Ga. L. 1953, Jan.-Feb. Sess., p. 416, § 1; Ga. L. 1953, Nov.-Dec. Sess., p. 207, § 1; Ga. L. 1985, p. 149, § 40; Ga. L. 1987, p. 3, § 40; Ga. L. 2006, p. 159, § 2/HB 1209.)
- Sentence and punishment generally, T. 17, C. 10.
Surcharges to or apportionment of fines in certain traffic offense cases, §§ 15-21-73,15-21-93,15-21-112,15-21-131,15-21-149,36-15-9,47-11-51,47-14-50,47-16-60, and47-17-60.
Punishment for misdemeanor traffic offenses generally, § 17-10-3.
Maximum fines for certain offenses, § 40-6-1.
- Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 2006, "Code section" was substituted for "subsection" in the introductory language of subsection (b).
- Ga. L. 2006, p. 159, § 3/HB 1209, and amended by Ga. L. 2010, p. 105, § 2-1/HB 981, not codified by the General Assembly, as amended by Ga. L. 2007, p. 47, § 15A/SB 103, and amended by Ga. L. 2010, p. 105, § 2-2/HB 981, provides: "This Act shall become effective on July 1, 2006."
Sheriff has right to costs for making arrest, even though the arrest is made contrary to the policy of the law that the person who makes the affidavit upon which a warrant is issued should not make the arrest thereunder. Cooper v. Lunsford, 203 Ga. 166, 45 S.E.2d 395 (1947).
- Georgia L. Ex. Sess., 1937-38, p. 558, authorizes the establishment of an insolvent cost fund for the benefit of the officers of courts of ordinary (now probate court). Cooper v. Lunsford, 203 Ga. 166, 45 S.E.2d 395 (1947).
- Law contemplates that an officer having a claim against an insolvent costs fund should present an itemized statement of the costs before being approved. When it is agreed, however, that the sheriff had performed a service for each item for which the sheriff has received costs from the court of ordinary (now probate court), the sheriff's failure to file a written itemized costs bill should not operate as a forfeiture of such costs as the sheriff had received, or the sheriff's right to participate in an insolvent costs fund. Cooper v. Lunsford, 203 Ga. 166, 45 S.E.2d 395 (1947).
- Probate judge who told criminal defendants that the defendants had the burden of proving their innocence, who allowed defendants to "buy out" their community service sentences and kept the proceeds in a bank account that the judge controlled, participated in ex parte communications, insulted and abused parties in the judge's court, and disposed of cases outside the jurisdiction of the probate court, was found in violation of Ga. Code Jud. Conduct Canons 1, 2, and 3, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VII, Para. VII(a), and O.C.G.A. §§ 16-10-32 and40-13-26, was removed from office and barred from seeking judicial office again. Inquiry Concerning Fowler, 287 Ga. 467, 696 S.E.2d 644 (2010).
- State highway patrolman is not entitled to fees for the performance of the patrolman's duties in criminal cases of whatever type the duties may be. 1948-49 Op. Att'y Gen. p. 49.
Ga. L. 1937-38, Ex. Sess., p. 558, § 7 (see now O.C.G.A. § 40-13-26) authorizes establishment of an insolvent cost fund for the benefit of the officers of the probate court. 1958-59 Op. Att'y Gen. p. 48.
- Municipality cannot collect and retain fines resulting from cases transferred from municipal court to superior court pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 40-13-23 since fines imposed by the superior court must be paid into the county treasury. 1984 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U84-44.
Since O.C.G.A. §§ 15-21-2 and15-21-52 mandate that all fines collected by county courts be paid into the county treasury, a municipality and county cannot contract to provide for the division of moneys received as fines by the superior court from cases transferred under O.C.G.A. § 40-13-23. 1984 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U84-44.
- 20 Am. Jur. 2d, Costs, §§ 1, 93 et seq.
Total Results: 1
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2010-06-28
Citation: 696 S.E.2d 644, 287 Ga. 467, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 2072, 2010 Ga. LEXIS 480
Snippet: 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, and OCGA § 40-13-26,[5] by allowing criminal defendants to "buy out"