Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 42-12-8 | Car Wreck Lawyer

TITLE 42 PENAL INSTITUTIONS

Section 12. Prison Litigation Reform, 42-12-1 through 42-12-9.

ARTICLE 5 FEES

42-12-8. Appeals.

Appeals of all actions filed by prisoners shall be as provided in Code Section 5-6-35.

(Code 1981, §42-12-8, enacted by Ga. L. 1996, p. 400, § 1.)

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Applicability.

- O.C.G.A. § 42-12-8 applied to an appeal in a case filed in a trial court before its effective date and in which there was no appealable judgment entered until after the effective date. Day v. Stokes, 268 Ga. 494, 491 S.E.2d 365 (1997).

Direct appeal by an incarcerated woman from a parental termination order in an action filed by the Department of Human Resources was proper since the requirement of O.C.G.A. § 42-12-8 to use discretionary appeal procedures applies only when the appellant is a prisoner or former prisoner appealing from an action that was filed by the appellant when he or she was a prisoner. In re K.W., 233 Ga. App. 140, 503 S.E.2d 394 (1998).

Discretionary application requirement of Georgia Prison Litigation Reform Act, O.C.G.A. § 42-12-8, was inapplicable to an injured party's renewed personal injury suit because the injured party was not a prisoner when the de novo action was filed. Baskin v. Ga. Dep't of Corr., 272 Ga. App. 355, 612 S.E.2d 565 (2005).

After the Sentence Review Panel reduced the sentences imposed on an inmate convicted of aggravated assault and false imprisonment, it was found that the Panel did not have the statutory authority to reduce the false imprisonment sentence, and a writ of mandamus was issued requiring the Department of Corrections to enforce the original sentence; the inmate's appeal from the denial of the inmate's motion to set aside the judgment granting the writ was subject to O.C.G.A. § 42-12-8 so the inmate had to pursue a discretionary, rather than direct, appeal. Griffin v. Keller, 278 Ga. 878, 608 S.E.2d 221 (2005).

Failure to comply with procedures.

- Court of Appeals was deprived of jurisdiction over an appeal from a prisoner's civil action concerning medical treatment the prisoner received because the prisoner failed to comply with the discretionary procedures as required by O.C.G.A. § 42-12-8. Botts v. Givens, 223 Ga. App. 139, 476 S.E.2d 816 (1996).

Trial court erred by failing to conduct a hearing on a prisoner's claim of indigence as the plain language of O.C.G.A. § 9-15-2(b) required a hearing before the court could order costs to be paid and there was nothing in the statute that allowed the court, on the court's own, to inquire into the truth of a pauper's affidavit to order the payment of court costs without a hearing. Lee v. Batchelor, 345 Ga. App. 559, 814 S.E.2d 416 (2018).

Prisoner's failure to comply with discretionary appeal procedures in appealing from the trial court's denial of the prisoner's pro se petition for mandamus required dismissal of the action. Jones v. Townsend, 267 Ga. 489, 480 S.E.2d 24 (1997).

Fact that the defendant was a prisoner invoked O.C.G.A. § 42-12-8, which set forth appellate procedural requirements under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, O.C.G.A. § 42-12-1 et seq.; thus, the defendant was required to pursue discretionary, rather than direct, review of a trial court's ruling denying the defendant's petition for a writ of mandamus. Harris v. State, 278 Ga. 805, 606 S.E.2d 248 (2004).

Prisoner's appeal in a suit seeking records from the prisoner's criminal case, which was not filed under the criminal docket numbers but as a separate civil mandamus petition, was not within the Supreme Court of Georgia's murder jurisdiction under Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. III(8); however it was within the court's jurisdiction over extraordinary remedies in death penalty proceedings under O.C.G.A. § 15-3-3.1(4). Still, the appeal was dismissed for failure to comply with O.C.G.A. § 42-12-8. Brock v. Hardman, 303 Ga. 729, 814 S.E.2d 736 (2018).

Cited in Coles v. State, 223 Ga. App. 491, 477 S.E.2d 897 (1996); Hall v. Linahan, 225 Ga. App. 439, 484 S.E.2d 65 (1997); Serpentfoot v. Salmon, 225 Ga. App. 478, 483 S.E.2d 927 (1997); Moulder v. Reilly, 226 Ga. App. 608, 487 S.E.2d 142 (1997); Thompson v. Reichert, 318 Ga. App. 23, 733 S.E.2d 342 (2012).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

- Validity, construction, and application of State Prison Litigation Reform Acts, 85 A.L.R.6th 229.

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 42-12-8

Total Results: 15  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Jones v. Townsend, 480 S.E.2d 24 (Ga. 1997).

Cited 190 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Feb 3, 1997 | 267 Ga. 489, 97 Fulton County D. Rep. 354

...[2] To rectify the perceived imbalances in the judicial *25 system toward which the Act was directed, the legislature provided procedures for monitoring prisoner litigation (see OCGA §§ 42-12-4 & 42-12-9) and placed certain burdens on prisoners seeking to conduct civil litigation. [3] See OCGA §§ 42-12-4 through 42-12-8. Of particular pertinence to this appeal is the restriction imposed in OCGA § 42-12-8: "Appeals of all actions filed by prisoners shall be as provided in Code Section 5-6-35." In the cases specified in OCGA § 5-6-35, and now in appeals of civil cases filed by prisoners, there is no right of direct appeal....
Copy

Henderson v. State, 303 Ga. 241 (Ga. 2018).

Cited 41 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 5, 2018

...re of mandamus,” the Court of Appeals concluded that, while the denial of a petition for mandamus is generally directly appealable, that was not the case when a discretionary appeal was required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996, OCGA § 42-12-8....
...n subject to the procedures and requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996. Id. But, after declaring that the defendant's post-conviction motion for a transcript was a civil action subject to the appeal provisions of OCGA § 42-12-8, the Court of Appeals pretermitted the question of appellate subject matter jurisdiction, instead dismissing that appeal because the notice of appeal was not timely filed....
Copy

Henderson v. State, 811 S.E.2d 388 (Ga. 2018).

Cited 41 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 5, 2018

...Treating the motion as "a petition in the nature of mandamus," the Court of Appeals concluded that, while the denial of a petition for mandamus is generally directly appealable, that was not the case when a discretionary appeal was required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996, OCGA § 42-12-8....
...te civil action subject to the procedures and requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996. Id. But, after declaring that the defendant's post-conviction motion for a transcript was a civil action subject to the appeal provisions of OCGA § 42-12-8, the Court of Appeals pretermitted the question of appellate subject matter jurisdiction, instead dismissing that appeal because the notice of appeal was not timely filed....
Copy

Brock v. Hardman, 303 Ga. 729 (Ga. 2018).

Cited 39 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | May 21, 2018

...ng proceedings in which a sentence of death was imposed or could be imposed,” and thus we have jurisdiction under OCGA § 15-3-3.1 (a) (4). Nevertheless, Brock’s appeal must be dismissed for failure to file a discretionary application as OCGA § 42-12-8 requires for civil cases filed by prisoners. The record shows that Brock was convicted of two counts of murder and other offenses in 2011....
...Our conclusion that we have jurisdiction over this appeal doesn’t help Brock, though, because the appeal still must be dismissed. Brock filed this civil action as a prisoner, and appeals from such actions must proceed via the discretionary application process. See OCGA § 42-12-8; Harris v....
Copy

Brock v. Hardman, 814 S.E.2d 736 (Ga. 2018).

Cited 38 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | May 21, 2018

...We conclude that this appeal arises from an extraordinary remedies case "concerning proceedings in which a sentence of death was imposed or could be imposed," and thus we have jurisdiction under OCGA § 15-3-3.1 (a) (4). Nevertheless, Brock's appeal must be dismissed for failure to file a discretionary application as OCGA § 42-12-8 requires for civil cases filed by prisoners. The record shows that Brock was convicted of two counts of murder and other offenses in 2011....
...Our conclusion that we have jurisdiction over this appeal doesn't help Brock, though, because the appeal still must be dismissed. Brock filed this civil action as a prisoner, and appeals from such actions must proceed via the discretionary application process. See OCGA § 42-12-8 ; Harris v....
Copy

Murphy v. Murphy, 295 Ga. 376 (Ga. 2014).

Cited 33 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 30, 2014 | 761 S.E.2d 53

...judgments that arise from prior occurrences. For example, in Day v. Stokes, 268 Ga. 494 (491 SE2d 365) (1997), this 4 Court applied the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act of 1996, OCGA § 42-12-1 et seq., specifically OCGA § 42-12-8, which requires that appeals in all prisoner suits proceed by application for discretionary appeal pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-35....
Copy

Ray v. Barber, 548 S.E.2d 283 (Ga. 2001).

Cited 26 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 4, 2001 | 273 Ga. 856

...We granted the application to consider whether a non-prisoner defendant is required to follow the discretionary application procedures when appealing an action filed by a prisoner. Because the statutory language is clear, we hold that a discretionary application is required. 1. OCGA § 42-12-8 provides that "[a]ppeals of all actions filed by prisoners shall be as provided in Code Section 5-6-35 *284 [the discretionary appeal provision]." The Board contends that the legislative intent of the statute shows that the discretionary application process should only apply to appeals filed by prisoners....
Copy

Smith v. Nichols, 512 S.E.2d 279 (Ga. 1999).

Cited 20 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Feb 22, 1999 | 270 Ga. 550, 99 Fulton County D. Rep. 745

..."[I]t is the duty of this court to raise the question of its jurisdiction in all cases in which there may be any doubt as to the existence of such jurisdiction. [Cits.]." Stephenson v. Futch, 213 Ga. 247(1), 98 S.E.2d 374 (1957). Appellant's status as a prisoner raises the possibility that OCGA § 42-12-8, the statute which sets forth appellate procedural requirements under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, OCGA § 42-12-1 et seq....
Copy

Brown v. Crawford, 715 S.E.2d 132 (Ga. 2011).

Cited 11 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Sep 12, 2011 | 289 Ga. 722

...The legislature created several control mechanisms in the Act, including "procedures for monitoring prisoner litigation (see OCGA §§ 42-12-4 & 42-12-9) and [the placement of] certain burdens on prisoners seeking to conduct civil litigation. See OCGA §§ 42-12-4 through 42-12-8." Jones v. Townsend, 267 Ga. 489, 490, 480 S.E.2d 24 (1997). The provision relevant to the present appeals is the restriction imposed in OCGA § 42-12-8, stating that "[a]ppeals of all actions filed by prisoners shall be as provided in Code Section 5-6-35." OCGA § 5-6-35, when applicable, requires that an appeal of an order issued by the trial court follow a discretionary application procedure....
...procedure results in dismissal *134 of the appeal. [Cit.]" Smith v. Nichols, supra. However, the legislature expressly exempted appeals from criminal convictions and habeas corpus filings from the ambit of the Act, including the requirement in OCGA § 42-12-8 mandating a discretionary review procedure for an appeal....
...ns for writ of habeas corpus. Ga. L.1999, p. 847, § 1. Pursuant to this amendment, a prisoner who files a petition for writ of habeas corpus now must abide by all procedures in the Act except for OCGA §§ 42-12-4 through 42-12-7 but including OCGA § 42-12-8....
...uired to file an application for discretionary review in this Court. Although the appellant in Case No. S11A1124 is the DeKalb County Sheriff and thus not a prisoner, this Court in Ray v. Barber, 273 Ga. 856(1), 548 S.E.2d 283 (2001), held that OCGA § 42-12-8 applies when a non-prisoner files an appeal of an action originally filed by a prisoner....
...Brown asks us to overrule Ray v. Barber, 273 Ga. 856, 548 S.E.2d 283 (2001), which held that the Prison Litigation Reform Act's (PLRA) appeals provision—"[a]ppeals of all actions filed by prisoners shall" proceed by discretionary application, OCGA § 42-12-8 requires even non-prisoner appellants to file discretionary applications....
Copy

Harris v. State, 278 Ga. 805 (Ga. 2004).

Cited 9 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Nov 22, 2004 | 606 S.E.2d 248, 2004 Fulton County D. Rep. 3771

...there may be any doubt as to the existence of such jurisdiction. [Cits.]” Smith v. Nichols, 270 Ga. 550, 551 (512 SE2d 279) (1999), quoting Stephenson v. Futch, 213 Ga. 247 (1) (98 SE2d 374) (1957). The fact that Harris is a prisoner invokes OCGA § 42-12-8, the statute which sets forth appellate procedural requirements under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, OCGA § 42-12-1 et seq....
Copy

Day v. Stokes, 268 Ga. 494 (Ga. 1997).

Cited 7 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Oct 14, 1997 | 491 S.E.2d 365, 97 Fulton County D. Rep. 3754

...ourt on June 19, 1995, he was in prison. The final order was filed on February 14, 1997, and the notice of appeal was filed March 7, 1997. The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996, OCGA § 42-12-1 et seq., has an effective date of April 2,1996. OCGA § 42-12-8 requires appeals in all prisoner suits to proceed by application for discretionary appeal in accordance with OCGA § 5-6-35. There was no application in this case. Under the principle that this Court is bound to examine its jurisdiction (Collins v. AT & T, 265 Ga. 37 (456 SE2d 50) (1995)), we must determine what effect OCGA § 42-12-8 might have on this appeal....
...Ferris-Smith, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Those principles apply equally to the present circumstances. Day’s right to appeal the judgment below did not accrue until judgment was entered, and by that time a discretionary appeal application was required by OCGA § 42-12-8....
Copy

Donald v. Price, 658 S.E.2d 569 (Ga. 2008).

Cited 5 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 10, 2008 | 283 Ga. 311, 8 Fulton County D. Rep. 762, 8 FCDR 762

...Acting pro se, he filed a mandamus petition against the Warden of that prison and the Commissioner of the Department of Corrections (Appellants). The trial court granted mandamus relief, and this Court unanimously granted the Warden's application for discretionary appeal. See OCGA § 42-12-8....
Copy

Baez v. Flanders, 300 Ga. 763 (Ga. 2017).

Cited 2 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 20, 2017 | 798 S.E.2d 232

...g as in other cases. An order denying filing shall be appealable in the same manner as an order dismissing an action. Baez filed an application for discretionary revie w of the order that disallowed filing, and we granted his application. See OCGA § 42-12-8. We recently warned that, despite some dicta to the contrary in Smith, a motion to recuse must be filed within the time required by Uniform Superior Court Rule 25.1 to preserve a judicial disqualification issue....
Copy

Griffin v. Keller, 278 Ga. 878 (Ga. 2005).

Cited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jan 24, 2005 | 608 S.E.2d 221, 2005 Fulton County D. Rep. 216

...review. Id. More accurately, Griffin is a third party movant attempting to set aside a judgment in a mandamus action related to his sentence. Inasmuch as Griffin is a prisoner, his appeal from the mandamus ruling is subject to the provisions of OCGA § 42-12-8, the statute which sets forth appellate procedural requirements under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, OCGA § 42-12-1 et seq....

Murphy v. Murphy (Ga. 2014).

Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 30, 2014 | 608 S.E.2d 221, 2005 Fulton County D. Rep. 216

...judgments that arise from prior occurrences. For example, in Day v. Stokes, 268 Ga. 494 (491 SE2d 365) (1997), this Court applied the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996, OCGA § 42-12-1 et 4 seq., specifically OCGA § 42-12-8, which requires that appeals in all prisoner suits proceed by application for discretionary appeal pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-35....