O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 42-5-3 (2019)

Department’s responsibility for trial costs and expenses

✓ 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 whole costs of the case and expenses of the trial involving an inmate of the state penal system charged with the violation of any criminal statute shall be borne by the department, provided the offense was committed by the inmate within the confines of a state correctional institution or was the crime of escape or attempted escape. The costs and expenses of the trial shall include, but shall not be limited to, the cost of the sheriff, bailiff, clerks, jurors, and jail fees and shall be paid by the department to the governing authority of the county in which the trial was conducted, for proper disposition.

History

Orig. Code 1863, § 4690; Code 1868, § 4714; Code 1873, § 4812; Code 1882, § 4812; Penal Code 1895, § 1174; Penal Code 1910, § 1230; Code 1933, § 77-401; Ga. L. 1964, p. 462, § 1; Ga. L. 1975, p. 1590, § 1.

Annotations

Cross references. Payment of costs of criminal proceedings generally, § 17-11-1 et seq. Administrative rules and regulations. Evaluations and Inspections, Official Compilation of the Rules and Regulations

of the State of Georgia, Board of Corrections, Administration, Administration, Rule 125-1-2-.10. Investigations and Intelligence, Official Compilation of the Rules and Regulations of the State of Georgia, Board of Corrections, Administration, Administration, Rule 125-1-2-.11. Rewards, Official Compilation of the Rules and Regulations of the State of Georgia, Board of Corrections, Institutional and Center Operations, Custody and Security, Rule 125-3-1-.09.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Fund out of which expenses paid. - No reference is made in this section or elsewhere in this Code as to the fund from which the expense is to be paid, and it seems that the provision that the expense shall be paid out of the penitentiary fund remains unrepealed. Campbell v. Davison,

162 Ga. 221, 133 S.E. 468, 1926 Ga. LEXIS 145 (1926). Appeal of ex parte orders sealing inmate records by Department of Corrections. - O.C.G.A. § 5-7-1 et seq., which limited appeals by the state in criminal cases, did not apply to the De-

STATE/COUNTY CORRECTIONAL INST.

partment of Corrections (DOC) in the Department’s appeal from an ex parte order sealing records of visits to inmates charged with prison guard murders; the statute applied to the prosecuting attorney responsible for the criminal case, not

state entities and actors who had no control over prosecutions, although the DOC was responsible for the cost of prosecution of the inmates. State v. Rowe, 308 Ga. 806, 843 S.E.2d 537, 2020 Ga. LEXIS 345 (2020).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Costs of trial conducted after discharge from custody. - Board is liable for costs of trial of former inmate in custody of department tried for crime committed while inmate was incarcerated in custody of department, but whose trial will take place after the inmate is discharged from custody. 1979 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 79-64. Costs include incarceration in local jail during trial but not for incarceration, if any, at the local jail after the trial

and before the inmate is returned to the custody of the Department of Offender Rehabilitation (Corrections). 1979 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 79-64. Other costs and fees department obligated to pay. - Department of Corrections is obligated to pay all costs and expenses listed on the statement submitted to the department, including courtappointed attorneys’ fees and the per diem of the court reporter. 1963-65 Ga. Op. Att’y Gen. 743.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2020–2020 · leading case: State v. Rowe, 843 S.E.2d 537 (Ga. 2020).
State v. Rowe, 843 S.E.2d 537 (Ga. 2020). · cites it 2× “Admittedly, there is more occasion for some involvement by the DOC in criminal cases arising out of crimes committed in prisons, because the DOC remains responsible for the prison and the defendant after a crime is committed, because prison staff and inmates will often be…”
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.