O.C.G.A. § 9-14-19 (2019)
Powers of court in cases not covered by Code Sections 9-14-16 through 9-14-18
In cases other than those specified in Code Sections 9-14-16, 9-14-17, and 9-14-18, the judge hearing the return shall discharge, remand, or admit the person in question to bail or shall deliver him to the custody of the officer or person entitled thereto, as the principles of law and justice may require.
History
(Orig. Code 1863, § 3927; Code 1868, § 3950; Code 1873, § 4026; Code 1882, § 4026; Penal Code 1895, § 1229; Penal Code 1910, § 1310; Code 1933, § 50-119.)
Annotations
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - Article 2 of this chapter now provides the exclusive procedure for seeking a writ of habeas corpus for persons whose liberty is being restrained by virtue of a sentence of a state court of record, expanding the scope of habeas in such cases. See O.C.G.A. §§ 9-14-40 and 9-14-41. Return to writ of habeas corpus is to be heard by judge granting the writ not by jury. Sumner v. Sumner, 117 Ga. 229, 43 S.E. 485 (1903). Duty of court in habeas proceeding. - In habeas corpus proceeding, duty of the court is not necessarily to discharge one illegally restrained, but to determine whether at the time of the hearing the ends of justice require that such person be committed to the proper custody. Lowe v. Taylor, 180 Ga. 654, 180 S.E. 223 (1935). Investigation of whether law and justice require release intended. - It is the plain intent of the law of this state that upon the hearing of a writ of habeas corpus, the investigation is not concerned with whether original confinement was illegal but whether or not the principles of law and justice require at the time of the hearing that a person be released. Lowe v. Taylor, 180 Ga. 654, 180 S.E. 223 (1935).
Release of convict on private chain gang. - Convicts may not be worked on private chain gangs controlled by private individuals and a convict confined on such a chain gang should be released from the individuals controlling the chain gang and remanded to the custody of the authorities. Simmons v. Georgia Iron & Coal Co., 117 Ga. 305, 43 S.E. 780, 61 L.R.A. 739 (1903). See also Russell v. Tatum, 104 Ga. 332, 30 S.E. 812 (1898). Release of involuntary detainee. - Trial court did not exceed the court’s authority by granting a writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-14-19, to an involuntary detainee who had been committed to a state hospital upon a finding of not guilty by reason of insanity in the deaths of the detainee’s grandparents and ordering that the state hospital officials prepare a plan for supervision and outpatient services upon the detainee’s release; the detainee was entitled to seek relief by that route, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 37-3-148(a), or by seeking a release petition pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 17-7-131(f ). Hogan v. Nagel, 276 Ga. 197, 576 S.E.2d 873 (2003). Cited in Beavers v. Williams, 199 Ga. 114, 33 S.E.2d 343 (1945); Tompkins v. Hall, 291 Ga. 224, 728 S.E.2d 621 (2012).
RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 39 Am. Jur. 2d, Habeas Corpus and Postconviction Remedies, § 163.
C.J.S. - 39A C.J.S., Habeas Corpus, § 368 et seq.