Confinement of misdemeanants.

- Defendant was not eligible under O.C.G.A. § 17-10-3 for state probation detention center sentencing for misdemeanor battery since the defendant did not fit into one of the narrow categories set forth in O.C.G.A. § 42-8-35.4. Anderson v. State, 261 Ga. App. 716, 583 S.E.2d 549 (2003).

Sentence authorized.

- O.C.G.A. § 42-8-35.4 allowed a court to order the confinement of a defendant in a probation detention center if the defendant was convicted of a felony and sentenced to a period of at least one year on probation. Defendant's sentence met these statutory requirements. Johnson v. State, 283 Ga. App. 425, 641 S.E.2d 655 (2007).

Construction with O.C.G.A. § 17-10-1. - Reading O.C.G.A. §§ 17-10-1(a)(3)(A) and42-8-35.4 together, a court can confine a probation violator in a probation detention center, but not if probation is revoked for any of the reasons enumerated in O.C.G.A. § 17-10-1(a)(3)(A), and only if the defendant was put on probation previously for a forcible misdemeanor or a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature; a defendant who pled guilty to the misdemeanors of habitual violator, driving under the influence, possession of marijuana, and operating a vehicle without proof of insurance did not meet the criteria for confinement in a probation detention center upon revocation of probation under O.C.G.A. § 42-8-35.4, and so confinement in such a facility was unauthorized. Wilson v. Windsor, 280 Ga. 576, 630 S.E.2d 367 (2006).

Transfer.

- Trial court did not err in denying a probationer's motion to modify a sentence because the probationer's claim was cognizable only in a mandamus action against the Commissioner of the Department of Corrections or in a petition for habeas corpus since the probationer's sole complaint went to the Department's decision to transfer the probationer from a probation center to a state prison under O.C.G.A. § 42-8-35.4(c), and the probationer expressly agreed as a special condition of probation that the Department could transfer the probationer to other facilities if necessary; Code Section42-8-35.4 does not require the Department to transfer a probationer to a probation detention center nor does the statute prohibit the Department from transferring a probationer to a prison. Hillis v. State, 303 Ga. App. 201, 692 S.E.2d 793 (2010).

Defendant eligible to serve ordered term of confinement.

- Trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to correct an illegal sentence because, in accordance with the plain language of the First Offender Act, O.C.G.A. § 42-8-65(c), during the defendant's term of confinement, the defendant, who pled guilty to first degree cruelty to children, O.C.G.A. § 16-5-70, was deemed to be a convicted felon for purposes of the State-Wide Probation Act, O.C.G.A. § 42-8-35.4, and consequently, within a category of persons eligible to serve the ordered term of confinement at a probation detention center; the legislature is presumed to have had full knowledge of the First Offender Act when the legislature enacted the State-Wide Probation Act. Mason v. State, 310 Ga. App. 118, 712 S.E.2d 76 (2011).

Confinement of misdemeanants.

- While misdemeanants may only be referred to probation centers upon initial sentencing pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 42-8-35.4, misdemeanants may also be referred to such facilities pursuant to probation revocation proceedings under O.C.G.A. § 42-8-34.1 and after a probation revocation proceeding pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 17-10-1(a)(3)(A). 1999 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 99-14.