Syfert Injury Law Firm
Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448After reviewing the pleadings and evidence offered at the trial of the case, the judge of the superior court hearing the case shall make written findings of fact and conclusions of law upon which the judgment is based. The findings of fact and conclusions of law shall be recorded as part of the record of the case.
(Code 1933, § 50-127, enacted by Ga. L. 1967, p. 835, § 3.)
- Ruling on petition, Ga. Unif. S. Ct. R. 44.12.
This section simply requires the trial judge to set out the judge's findings of fact, showing a consideration of the facts of the case and a determination in relation to these facts. Day v. Mills, 224 Ga. 741, 164 S.E.2d 828 (1968).
This section does not require the trial court at a habeas hearing to set forth each fact upon which the court bases the court's finding, as these facts appear in the record, and no useful purpose would be accomplished by having the trial judge repeat them. Day v. Mills, 224 Ga. 741, 164 S.E.2d 828 (1968).
This section does not require trial court at a habeas corpus hearing to set forth each fact upon which the court bases its finding. Brown v. Holland, 228 Ga. 628, 187 S.E.2d 246 (1972), overruled on other grounds, Hall v. Hopper, 234 Ga. 625, 216 S.E.2d 839 (1975).
- O.C.G.A. § 9-14-49 did not authorize the superior court in a habeas corpus proceeding to remand the proceeding to another superior court for a finding as to whether the defendant voluntarily made a statement to a prison official which was used in cross-examination at the defendant's trial. Newsome v. Black, 258 Ga. 787, 374 S.E.2d 733 (1989).
- Trial court was not authorized to remand a habeas proceeding to another superior court, or to order the filing of an extraordinary motion for new trial in another superior court; a final order transferring the defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claims to another county was void ab initio as an unauthorized exercise of authority. Martin v. Astudillo, 280 Ga. 295, 627 S.E.2d 34 (2006).
- Trial court makes sufficient findings of fact by expressly ruling as a matter of fact that none of the petitioner's constitutional rights have been violated by the arresting officers, and that the petitioner has had a fair and legal trial. Brown v. Holland, 228 Ga. 628, 187 S.E.2d 246 (1972), overruled on other grounds, Hall v. Hopper, 234 Ga. 625, 216 S.E.2d 839 (1975).
- When the trial court referred in habeas corpus proceeding to the records admitted in the prior proceeding, and at least by implication, adopted the court's prior ruling on dismissal of the criminal appeal, the trial court complied with this section. McAuliffe v. Rutledge, 231 Ga. 1, 200 S.E.2d 100 (1973).
- Oral ruling that was cursory and not in compliance with the exact language of this section, but nonetheless embodied a finding that none of the petitioner's constitutional rights were violated, did not constitute reversible error. Bailey v. Baker, 232 Ga. 84, 205 S.E.2d 278 (1974).
- On trial of a habeas corpus case, the judge is the trier of both the law and the facts, and if there is any evidence to support the finding of the trial court, even though there is evidence to the contrary, such finding will not be disturbed. Williams v. Caldwell, 229 Ga. 453, 192 S.E.2d 378 (1972).
- Judgment denying an appellant's request for habeas relief was vacated and the case was remanded because the order denying relief contained no indication of the facts or law on which the trial court based the court's decision and therefore failed to meet the requirements of O.C.G.A. § 9-14-49. Thomas v. State, 284 Ga. 327, 667 S.E.2d 375 (2008), overruled on other grounds, Crosson v. Conway, 291 Ga. 220, 728 S.E.2d 617 (2012).
Cited in White v. Gnann, 225 Ga. 398, 169 S.E.2d 301 (1969); Stynchcombe v. Walden, 226 Ga. 63, 172 S.E.2d 402 (1970); Law v. Smith, 226 Ga. 298, 174 S.E.2d 893 (1970); Hughes v. Sikes, 273 Ga. 804, 546 S.E.2d 518 (2001); Greer v. Thompson, 281 Ga. 419, 637 S.E.2d 698 (2006); In re Baucom, 297 Ga. App. 661, 678 S.E.2d 118 (2009); Bennett v. Etheridge, 302 Ga. 33, 805 S.E.2d 38 (2017).
- 39 Am. Jur. 2d, Habeas Corpus and Postconviction Remedies, § 163.
- 39A C.J.S., Habeas Corpus, § 368 et seq.
Total Results: 20
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2023-06-29
Snippet: Edenfield’s incest conviction. See OCGA § 9-14-49 (requiring findings of fact and conclusions of
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2022-03-15
Snippet: put in writing to support its judgment, OCGA § 9- 14-49, and how that judgment must be appealed, OCGA
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2022-01-19
Snippet: law upon which the judgment is based.” OCGA § 9-14-49. Judgment reversed in part, and case remanded
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2021-11-23
Snippet: argue that the order fails to comply with OCGA § 9-14-49. Given a lack of evidence to the contrary, we
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2021-05-17
Snippet: law as to those grounds as required by OCGA § 9-14-49, 8 after which either party, if unsatisfied, could
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2019-04-15
Citation: 827 S.E.2d 276, 305 Ga. 629
Snippet: findings of fact and conclusions of law. See OCGA § 9-14-49 ; Thomas v. State , 284 Ga. 327, 328 (2), 667 S
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2018-01-16
Citation: 302 Ga. 763, 809 S.E.2d 468
Snippet: conclusions of law as part of the record, see OCGA § 9-14-49, and that the record (including the transcript
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2017-09-13
Citation: 302 Ga. 33, 805 S.E.2d 38, 2017 Ga. LEXIS 762
Snippet: in that order is not in issue here. See OCGA § 9-14-49.
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2016-10-03
Citation: 299 Ga. 701, 791 S.E.2d 806, 2016 Ga. LEXIS 603
Snippet: written final order in accordance with OCGA § 9-14-49. The record reflects that Garibay twice asked the
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2015-04-20
Snippet: it fails to meet the requirements of OCGA § 9-14-49. Accordingly, the judgment of the habeas court
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2015-04-20
Citation: 297 Ga. 37, 771 S.E.2d 898, 2015 Ga. LEXIS 243
Snippet: based, it fails to meet the requirements of OCGA § 9-14-49. Accordingly, the judgment of the habeas court
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2012-02-27
Citation: 290 Ga. 636, 723 S.E.2d 441, 2012 Fulton County D. Rep. 586, 2012 WL 603796, 2012 Ga. LEXIS 207
Snippet: law upon which its decision is based. See OCGA § 9-14-49. The habeas court is also directed to include the
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2010-04-19
Citation: 694 S.E.2d 661, 287 Ga. 112, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 1431, 2010 Ga. LEXIS 319
Snippet: findings of fact and conclusions of law. See OCGA § 9-14-49; Thomas v. State, 284 Ga. 327(2), 667 S.E.2d 375
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2009-10-19
Citation: 684 S.E.2d 641, 2009 Fulton County D. Rep. 3324, 2009 Ga. LEXIS 640
Snippet: 284 Ga. 327(2), 667 S.E.2d 375 (2008); OCGA § 9-14-49. Judgment affirmed in part and vacated in part
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2008-09-22
Citation: 667 S.E.2d 375, 284 Ga. 327, 2008 Fulton County D. Rep. 2959, 2008 Ga. LEXIS 745
Snippet: facts or conclusions of law as required by OCGA § 9-14-49. We granted the application for certificate of
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2006-11-20
Citation: 637 S.E.2d 698, 281 Ga. 419, 2006 Fulton County D. Rep. 3587, 2006 Ga. LEXIS 983
Snippet: the remaining issues which complies with OCGA § 9-14-49. Judgment reversed and case remanded with direction
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2006-02-27
Citation: 280 Ga. 295, 627 S.E.2d 34, 2006 Fulton County D. Rep. 588, 2006 Ga. LEXIS 148
Snippet: findings of fact and conclusions of law. OCGA § 9-14-49. “If the [habeas] court finds in favor of the petitioner
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2004-03-01
Citation: 593 S.E.2d 344, 277 Ga. 659, 2004 Fulton County D. Rep. 767, 2004 Ga. LEXIS 182
Snippet: Ga. 804, 805 (3) (546 SE2d 518) (2001); OCGA § 9-14-49. “Shall be reviewed and determined” are words of
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2001-05-07
Citation: 546 S.E.2d 518, 273 Ga. 804
Snippet: fact and conclusions of law required by OCGA § 9-14-49. Accordingly, the order is vacated and the case
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1989-01-06
Citation: 374 S.E.2d 733, 258 Ga. 787, 1989 Ga. LEXIS 16
Snippet: ordered. The attorney general appeals. 1. OCGA § 9-14-49 provides: After reviewing the pleadings and evidence