O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 42-12-7.1 (2019)

Payment of fees from prisoner’s inmate account upon filing of habeas corpus petition

✓ 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

The following provisions shall apply when an indigent prisoner files a petition for habeas corpus:

(1) The indigent prisoner shall pay the current balance of funds in the prisoner’s inmate account; (2) The clerk of court shall notify the superintendent of the institution in which the prisoner is incarcerated that a petition for habeas corpus has been filed. Notice to the superintendent shall include: (A) The prisoner’s name, inmate number, and civil action number; and (B) The amount of the court costs and fees due and payable; and (3) Upon notification by the clerk of court that an indigent prisoner has filed a petition for habeas corpus, the superintendent shall: (A) Immediately freeze the prisoner’s inmate account; and (B) Order that all moneys deposited into the prisoner’s inmate account be forwarded to the clerk until all court costs and fees are satisfied, whereupon the freezing of the account shall be terminated.

History

Code 1981, § 42-12-7.1, enacted by Ga. L. 1999, p. 847, § 2.

Annotations

Cross references. Habeas corpus, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. 1, Sec. 1, Para. XV.

Habeas corpus, § 9-14-1 et seq. Law reviews. For note on 1999 enactment of this Code section, see 16 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 219 (1999).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case (1 in the last 5 years), 2023–2023 · leading case: Daker v. Bland (S.D. Ga. 2023).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Daker v. Bland (S.D. Ga. 2023). · cites it 9× “As to the state law claims, Plaintiff argues the Magistrate Judge did not properly consider his argument that O.C.G.A. § 42-12-7.1 is unconstitutional and cannot provide the proper authorization for Defendants to freeze his inmate account.”

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.