Procedure for Impaneling Special Grand Jury; Number of Jurors; Foreperson; Powers of Jury

1. Law
2. Georgia Code
3. Courts
4. Juries
5. Grand Juries
6. Special Purpose Grand Juries
7. Procedure for Impaneling Special Grand Jury; Number of Jurors; Foreperson; Powers of Jury

1. The chief judge of the superior court of any county to which this part applies, on his or her own motion, on motion or petition of the district attorney, or on petition of any elected public official of the county or of a municipality lying wholly or partially within the county, may request the judges of the superior court of the county to impanel a special grand jury for the purpose of investigating any alleged violation of the laws of this state or any other matter subject to investigation by grand juries as provided by law.
2. Until July 1, 2012, the chief judge of the superior court of the county shall submit the question of impaneling a special grand jury to the judges of the superior court of the county and, if a majority of the total number of the judges vote in favor of impaneling a special grand jury, the members of a special grand jury shall be drawn in the manner prescribed by Code Section 15-12-62. On and after July 1, 2012, the chief judge of the superior court of the county shall submit the question of impaneling a special grand jury to the judges of the superior court of the county and, if a majority of the total number of the judges vote in favor of impaneling a special grand jury, the members of a special grand jury shall be chosen in the manner prescribed by Code Section 15-12-62.1. Any special grand jury shall consist of not less than 16 nor more than 23 persons. The foreperson of any special grand jury shall be selected in the manner prescribed by Code Section 15-12-67.
3. While conducting any investigation authorized by this part, investigative grand juries may compel evidence and subpoena witnesses; may inspect records, documents, correspondence, and books of any department, agency, board, bureau, commission, institution, or authority of the state or any of its political subdivisions; and may require the production of records, documents, correspondence, and books of any person, firm, or corporation which relate directly or indirectly to the subject of the investigation being conducted by the investigative grand jury.

(Code 1933, § 59-602a, enacted by Ga. L. 1974, p. 270, § 1; Ga. L. 2011, p. 59, § 1-37/HB 415; Ga. L. 2016, p. 186, § 4/HB 941.)

The 2016 amendment, effective July 1, 2016, in subsection (a), inserted "or her", and inserted ", on motion or petition of the district attorney," near the middle.

Editor's notes.

- Ga. L. 2011, p. 59, § 1-1/HB 415, not codified by the General Assembly, provides: "This Act shall be known and may be cited as the 'Jury Composition Reform Act of 2011.'"

Law reviews.

- For annual survey on criminal law, see 64 Mercer L. Rev. 83 (2012).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Oath requirement inapplicable to civil investigations.

- O.C.G.A. § 15-12-68 is irrelevant to civil investigations conducted pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 15-12-71 and/or O.C.G.A. § 15-12-100 et seq. State v. Bartel, 223 Ga. App. 696, 479 S.E.2d 4 (1996).

No particular oath is required for witnesses in civil investigations; thus, it was error to dismiss a perjury indictment on the basis of a deficient oath since the oath administered named the grand jury, specified the type of investigation, named the subject entities being investigated, and contained accepted language regarding the promise and obligation to testify truthfully. State v. Bartel, 223 Ga. App. 696, 479 S.E.2d 4 (1996).

Special purpose grand jury not authorized to return criminal indictment.

- Trial court erred in holding that a special purpose grand jury was authorized to return a criminal indictment against a county commissioner because there was no language under O.C.G.A. § 15-12-100(a) giving a special purpose grand jury the power to return a criminal indictment; if the legislature had intended to empower a special purpose grand jury with the same powers and duties as a regular grand jury as provided in O.C.G.A. § 15-12-71, the legislature could have provided to that effect in § 15-12-100 or made reference to the powers enumerated in O.C.G.A. § 15-12-71. Kenerly v. State, 311 Ga. App. 190, 715 S.E.2d 688 (2011), cert. denied, 2012 Ga. LEXIS 265 (Ga. 2012).

Impact of special grand jury's overreach.

- Although the defendant established a violation of the impaneling order, which fixed the scope of the special purpose grand jury's investigative powers to county corruption, but not city, and it also constituted a violation of O.C.G.A. §§ 15-12-71 and15-12-102, neither dismissal of the indictment nor suppression of the evidence was the proper remedy for the grand jury's overreach as no violation of the defendant's constitutional rights nor a structural defect in the grand jury process occurred. State v. Lampl, 296 Ga. 892, 770 S.E.2d 629 (2015).

Download our app to see the most-to-date content.