O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 40-13-62 (2019)

Failure to appear; bench warrant

✓ 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

When any person cited for a traffic violation pursuant to this article fails to appear in court on the date specified in the citation and in accordance with his written promise to appear, unless such person has posted a cash bond as provided in this article, the traffic violations bureau thereupon loses jurisdiction and the citation shall be forwarded to the prosecuting attorney of the court who shall have an accusation issued against such person. Upon motion of the prosecuting attorney, a bench warrant shall issue based on the accusation for the arrest of the defendant. The defendant’s case shall be docketed by the clerk of the court and handled as all other misdemeanors.

History

(Ga. L. 1966, p. 381, § 12; Ga. L. 1992, p. 2785, § 29.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Section determines when accusation is ‘‘found.’’ - It is not until the traffic violations bureau loses jurisdiction to the state court under O.C.G.A. § 40-13-62 that a uniform traffic citation becomes an accusation and is ‘‘found’’ for

purposes of O.C.G.A. § 17-7-170. Keller v. State, 183 Ga. App. 717, 359 S.E.2d 714 (1987). Cited in Smith v. State, 270 Ga. App. 759, 608 S.E.2d 35 (2004).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1987–2004 · leading case: Geng v. State, 578 S.E.2d 115 (Ga. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Geng v. State, 578 S.E.2d 115 (Ga. 2003). · cites it 12× “" OCGA § 40-13-62. Geng's demand for a jury trial was denied based on the language of OCGA § 40-13-60.”

Adams v. State, 375 S.E.2d 642 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 4× “" The 1987 amendment to OCGA § 17-7-170 (a) eliminated the word "found" from the statute and substituted in its place the words "filed with the clerk" was "filed." In addition, the amendment substituted for the requirement that "the demand for trial shall be placed on the…”

Keller v. State, 359 S.E.2d 714 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “OCGA § 40-13-62 establishes that the traffic violations bureau loses jurisdiction only in the event the defendant fails to appear to answer the charges against him, in which case “a bench warrant shall issue based on the accusation [and the] case shall be docketed by the clerk…”

Ramsey v. State, 375 S.E.2d 63 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “” OCGA § 40-13-62. (Emphasis supplied.) In the instant case when the subterfuge as to the identity of the offender was discovered, the case was transferred to the district attorney’s office, the state court lost jurisdiction, and following the felony indictment as a habitual…”

Smith v. State, 608 S.E.2d 35 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “, the TVB loses jurisdiction over a person cited for a traffic violation under the statute who fails to appear in court as ordered and the matter is thereafter processed as a misdemeanor, OCGA § 40-13-62, or an offender may file a proper demand for jury trial in lieu of…”

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.