Law Assistants and Court Administrators for Judicial Circuits; Circuits Having Institutions for Carrying Out Death Sentences

  1. Law
  2. Georgia Code
  3. Courts
  4. Superior Courts
  5. General Provisions
  6. Law Assistants and Court Administrators for Judicial Circuits; Circuits Having Institutions for Carrying Out Death Sentences

Checkout our iOS App for a better way to browser and research.

  1. The chief judge of each judicial circuit is authorized to employ either one law assistant or one court administrator for the circuit. Each judicial circuit is authorized to employ additional law assistants and administrators subject to availability of funds.
  2. The chief judge of a judicial circuit wherein there is located an institution of the state designated by the Department of Corrections for carrying out the death sentence is authorized to employ a law assistant whose primary duty shall be to assist the court in handling appeals made by individuals awaiting execution.
  3. All personnel actions involving law assistants and court administrators employed pursuant to this Code section shall be in accordance with the provisions of Code Section 15-6-27.
  4. Funds for salaries, expenses, and other remuneration for law assistants and court administrators employed pursuant to this Code section shall be paid from state funds appropriated or otherwise available for the operation of the superior courts.

(Ga. L. 1980, p. 455, §§ 1, 2; Ga. L. 1985, p. 1279, § 1; Ga. L. 1986, p. 1488, § 1; Ga. L. 1993, p. 1402, § 19; Ga. L. 1994, p. 97, § 15; Ga. L. 1997, p. 1335, § 4; Ga. L. 1999, p. 736, § 1.)

Cross references.

- Reimbursement to counties for habeas corpus costs, § 9-14-53.

Death penalty generally, § 17-10-30 et seq.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Delegation of power to excuse jurors.

- If the clerk delegated the duty of handling excusals to the court administrator and the chief deputy clerk, the court administrator (who excused some veniremen) did not have such power if the court administrator was not authorized expressly by the chief judge to excuse jurors, but there was no such disregard of the essential and substantial provisions of the statute as would vitiate the arrays. Hendrick v. State, 257 Ga. 17, 354 S.E.2d 433 (1987).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

- Effect of Law Clerk's Conflict of Interest, 49 A.L.R.7th Art. 3


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