Fourteenth annual report on the work of the Georgia courts [Feb. 1988]

Fourteenth

Contents

Annual Report The Courts in Review: FY 1987

on the

Supreme Court

7

Court of Appeals

9

Work of the

Superior Courts

10

Georgia Courts State Courts

14

FY 1987

Juvenile Courts

15

Probate Courts

19

(July 1, 1986-June 30, 1987)

Magistrate Courts

23

Other Courts

26

Judicial Agencies

27

Judicial Council/Administrative Office of the Courts

27

Board of Court Reporting

31

Council of Juvenile Court Judges

32

Council of Superior Court Judges

33

Georgia Indigent Defense Council

33

Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council

34

Institute of Continuing Judicial Education

35

Judicial Nominating Commission

37

Judicial Qualifications Commission

37

Superior Courts Sentence Review Panel

39

Appendix 1: Judicial Personnel Changes

40

February 1988
Judicial Council of Georgia Administrative Office of the Courts Suite 550 244 Washington Street, SW Atlanta, Georgia 30334
J-0288-A-01

The Fourteenth Annual Report on the Work of the Georgia Courts is published by the Judicial Council of Georgia/Administrative Office of the Courts in compliance with OCGA 15-5-24 and by Order of the Supreme Court of Georgia dated June 12, 1978.
All rights reserved. Inquiries for usc of any material should be directed to: Senior Communications Officer, Administrative Office of the Courts of Georgia.

Foreword

T his Fourteenth Annual Report on the Work of the Georgia Courts, prepared by the Administrative Office of the Courts, is issued pursuant to therequirement of Ga. Laws 1973, p. 288 and Order of the Supreme Court of Georgia dated June 12, 1978.
Operation of the state's courts is improving daily, chiefly as a result of the concentrated efforts of the officials at every level of the Georgia judicial branch. I commend the many judges, clerks and other personnel who consistently work to guarantee our citizens an accessible, efficient and quality court system.
One way in which we have been successful in the timely processing of cases in all courts is through expanded use of computers. Computer applications in Georgia courts no longer cluster about urban areas in the northern part of the state, as they have almost become a necessity in case management and so that various courts and state departments can "talk" to each other. A committee of superior court judges is considering possibilities of computerization and has studied kinds of information processing that can be valuable not only to the judiciary but to other state agencies. County systems have been developed to meet the particular needs of individual jurisdictions. The Supreme Court has implemented a system for maintaining a data base of recent opinions and expects to offer public access to its docket and opinions via computer in the near future.
Since 1981, there has been a 19 percent reduction in the total number of open cases and a decrease by 31 percent in the average time from filing to disposition for both civil and criminal cases in our superior courts. The greatest decrease in processing time (35%) was observed in the domestic relations category, which dropped from 10.2 months in 1981 to 6.6 months in 1985. Specific case processing times now compare favorably with standards adopted by the national Conference of State Court Administrators. These improvements can be attributed to an increase in the number of superior court judges to handle an increasing caseload and the diligent efforts of those judges, the work of court administrators and the improved recordkeeping of clerks of court.
After several attempts, we have started to develop a comprehensive program to plan and construct a juvenile justice system for our state's future. A basic premise of this program is a separate and distinct system geared toward youthful offenders for the purpose of dispensing justice and providing treatment for Georgia's youth. Another component is the creation of full-time specialized judgeships to hear juvenile cases. It is a challenge to all of us ~judicial, legislative, executive and our constituencies~ to establish such a coordinated program to ensure treatment and protection of our children. We must continue to build upon ground we have gained in our fight against child abuse as well.
This annual report is presented to inform the Governor, the General Assembly and the public of judicial branch activities carried out in response to the varied duties and responsibilities with which the courts, their officials and administrative agencies are charged. Readers are invited to review the following pages to observe ongoing improvement in the administration of justice in Georgia.

Thomas 0. Marshall Chairman Judicial Council of Georgia

Judicial Council of Georgia
January 1988

Chief Justice Thomas 0. Marshall Chainnan Supreme Court Atlanta

Judge J. Mike Greene President Council of Probate Court Judges
Gray

Presiding Justice Harold G. Clarke Vice Chainnan Supreme Court Atlanta

Judge Walker P. Johnson, Jr. Administrative Judge Third District Macon

Judge Nancy K. Aspinwall First Vice President Council of Probate Court Judges Hinesville

Judge Hugh Lawson Administrative Judge Eighth District Hawkinsville

Chief Judge A. W. Birdsong, Jr. Court of Appeals Atlanta
Judge George H. Carley Court of Appeals Atlanta
Judge A. Wallace Cato Administrative Judge Second District Bainbridge
Judge Jerry Day First Vice President Council of Magistrate Court Judges LaFayette
Judge James E. Findley Administrative Judge First District Reidsville
Judge William M. Fleming, Jr. Administrative Judge Tenth District Augusta
Judge Joel J. Fryer, Jr. Administrative Judge Fifth District Atlanta
Judge Arthur W. Fudger Administrative Judge Seventh District Buchanan
Judge Hilton Fuller President-elect Council of Superior Court Judges Decatur

Judge T. Jefferson Loftiss, II President-elect Council of Juvenile Court Judges Thomasville
Judge Robert E. McDuff President Council of State Court Judges Marietta
Judge Frank C. Mills, III Administrative Judge Ninth District Canton
Judge Clinton 0. Pearson President Council of Juvenile Court Judges Brunswick
Judge Alan F. Pilcher President CouncilofMagistrateCourtJudges Gainesville
Judge A. Blenn Taylor, Jr. President Council of Superior Court Judges Brunswick
Judge Curtis V. Tillman Administrative Judge Fourth District Decatur
Judge Andrew J. Whalen, Jr. Administrative Judge Sixth District Griffin
Judge Anne Workman President-elect Council of State Court Judges Decatur

The Courts in Review: FY 1987

Diverse groups and interests at all levels of the state's judicial system sought both new andestablished methods to effect efficiencies in court procedures and operations during FY'87. Even as the judiciary observed favorable results from its efforts to better manage caseload and reduce open caseload, endeavors were underway to further define goals and standards for case processing. The General Assembly positively responded to requests for new judgeships and assigned legislative commitatees to study local court issues. The statewide debate regarding treatment of youthful offenders continued, and the Chief Justice proposed goals for strengthening the structure of the juvenile justice system at the Governor's Conference on Juvenile Justice. Using local and federal grant funds,individual courts initiated programs tailored to their particular needs and problems.
According to an analysis of open caseload performed in FY'87 by the Administrative Office of the Courts, Georgia superior courts were successful in improving case processing methods. The progress has been attributed to an increase in judicial personnel, use of case management techniques and advancements in recordkeeping. From the period 1981 to 1985, superior court judges reduced the estimated average time to process all types of cases by 31 percentfrom 10.4 months to 7.2 months.
Although the total number of cases filed increased by almost 6,500, judges disposed of over 23,500 more cases during the fiveyear span. As a consequence of the high number of dispositions, the total number of open cases declined by almost 20 percent, which translated into a per judge reduction of 27 percent. Superior court judges reduced backlog-defined as civil cases older than six months and criminal cases older than four months-by 10 percent and cut the number of four-to-six year old open cases by one third. The greatest reduction in processing time was observed in the do-

mestic relations category, where there was a 35 percent decrease in time from filing to disposition and the average time dropped from 10.2 months in 1981 to 6.6 months in 1985.
Attempts to further understand what is happening in the superior courts resulted in the initiation of a project to provide detailed information about cases. Through funding from the U. S. Bureau of Justice Assistance, a pilot case-by-case reporting system began operating in the superior courts of six counties on July 1, 1986 to gather case management information and, ultimately, to supplant the manual casecount conducted each year. The objectives of the project are to define goals and standards for case processing, identify and help decrease case backlog and collect statistical information about age of open cases and time elapsed from filing to disposition.
Data forwarded to the Administrative Office of the Courts by the superior court clerks in Bartow, Fayette, Hall, Lumpkin, Pulaski and Rockdale counties was compiled and analyzed. Monthly reports summarizing 1) the inventory of open cases, 2) cases filed and disposed and open cases, 3) average civil and criminal case processing times (in days) per disposition method and 4) the number of specific types of cases open for specified lengths of time were generated and sent to each judge, district attorney, clerk and court administrator of the particular counties. The reports assisted these officials with trial calendaring, tracking individual cases and caseload management and allowed them to discern the causes of or control case delay.
In an effort to improve the casecount in superior courts, the ten district court administrators implemented a caseload census system by using personal computers purchased with FY'87 supplemental funds. Calendar year 1986 open caseload data was input at district offices to generate information to assist in future casecounts.

1

3.1.

14th Annual Report

l

The 1987 Georgia General Assembly approved measures creating additional manpower slots both on the circuit and county level for jurisdictions facing burgeoning caseloads. Four of the five judgeships recommended by the Judicial Council of Georgia were established-in the Brun-

cerns of the Governor's Judicial Process Review Commission in 1985. Following the introduction of a general proposal to specify procedures by which a state court may be merged into a superior court through enactment of local law, the House of Representatives created the Cobb County Court

system composed of a superior court and magistrate court would be desirable. The final recommendations proposed, among other changes, the merger of the state court into the superior court, the elimination of the civil court and the removal of civil jurisdiction from the magistrate court.

swick, Cobb, Griffin and Gwinnett judicial circuits-to take effect at the beginning of the 1988 fiscal year. The single-county Gwinnett circuit actually experienced the largest increase in the number of trial judges serving its superior, state and recorder's courts, as an additional judge was authorized for each of these courts.
Other than the Gwinnett state court, judgeships were created for the state courts of DeKalb and Muscogee counties. The State Court of Rockdale County was established as Georgia's sixty-third state court, one of 14 that operates full-time.
Along with circuit judicial personnel, the legislature investigated various aspects of court reorganization which were parallel con-

Consolidation Plan Study Committee to explore the feasibility of uniting the county's state and superior courts. This proposed merger was also evaluated by a national courts consultant who studied three major areas of concern: 1) jurisdictional overlap, 2) organizationally separate courts and 3) a three-tier hierarchy of courts.
Court organization was also analyzed in the Augusta Judicial Circuit by a team of district court administrators at the request of that county's board of commissioners, which was faced with budget requests involving additional court employees. The team studied Richmond County's state, civil and magistrate courts and concluded that a two-tier court

Preliminary action by the legislature resulted in the formation of a committee to study the efficacy of splitting the Brunswick Judicial Circuit and one to review the compensation of Chatham County court officials, both of which will report back to the 1988 General Assembly. A bill to redesign judicial retirement to combine six separate pension plans for prosecutors and trial and appellate judges will also be considered after a required analysis of its actuarial soundness. Also under study by the legislature is a Court of Appeals plan for preappeal settlement conferences, which would authorize the court to establish by rule a procedure using senior appellate and senior superior court judges for volun-

State Appropriations for the Judicial Branch: Fiscal Years 1986, 1987 and 1988

Budget UniVAgency
Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Superior Court (Total) Operations Council of Superior Court Judges Judicial Administrative Districts Prospective Attorneys' Council Sentence Review Panel
Juvenile Courts (Total) Operations Council of Juvenile Court Judges
Institute of Continuing Judicial Education (Total)
Operations Magistrate Courts Training Council
Judicial Council (Total) Operations Board of Court Reporting Case Counting Council of Magistrate Court Judges Council of Probate Court Judges Council of State Court Judges
Judicial Qualifications Commission
Judicial Branch Totals

FY 1986 Amended Appropriation
$ 3,174,486
3,606,414
28,372,779 27,058,697
51,378 609,002 538,924 114,778
196,899 0
196,899
280,912 263,500
17,412
640,621 552,486
21,035 67,100
0 0 0
104,325
$36,376,436

FY 1987 Amended Appropriation
$ 3,196,779
3,903,943
30,602,026 29,100,167
68,895 737,526 576,766 118,672
227,544 0
227,544
318,334 280,000
38,334
708,215 566,668
23,047 69,000 20,000 20,000
9,500
105,292
$39,062,133

Percent Change FY 86-87
0.7% 8.2% 7.9% 7.5% 34.1% 21.1% 7.0% 3.4% 15.6%
15.6%
13.3% 6.3%
120.2% 10.6% 2.6% 9.6% 2.8%
0.9% 7.4%

FY 1988 General Appropriation
$ 3,654,950
4,075,070
33,298,469 31,706,205
71,399 735,289 667,787 117,789
277,268 0
277,268
467,268 376,250
91,018
774,675 629,565
25,110 70,500 20,000 20,000
9,500
106,000
$42,653,700

2

Percent Change FY 87-88
14.3% 4.4%
8.8% 9.0% 3.6% -0.3% 15.8% -0.7%
21.9%
21.9%
46.8% 34.4% 137.4%
9.4% 11.1%
9.0% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 9.2%

FY1987

Five-Year Comparison of .Judicial Budget (1984-1988)

Fiscal year

Total state appropriation

Increase

Judicial appropriation

Percent of Increase state budget

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988

$ 3,960,829,559 4,364,827,675 5,225,947,058 5,412,225,000 5, 782,000,000

$ 275,300,893 403,998,116 861 '119,383 186,277,942 369,775,000

$ 30,010,038 33,042,076 36,376,436 39,062,133 42,653,700

$ 3,419,723 3,032,038 3,334,360 2,685,697 3,591,567

0.76% 0.76% 0.70% 0.72% 0.74%

tary arbitration of cases involving monetary damages following an appeal from superior court.
As in many other states, the tort reform battle was waged as both the House and Senate considered numerous changes in civil law. While a study published by a University of Georgia law professor showed that the vast majority of jury verdicts were moderate and that punitive damages, when awarded, were not excessive, the legislature adopted a major compromise measure 1) placing a $250,000 limit on most punitive damages, 2) permitting judges to alter a jury award when the parties consent and 3) allowing juries to be informed of other possible sources of victim compensation.

In response to a 1986 House Resolution urging superior court judges to employ restitution orders in child and sexual abuse cases, the Council of Superior Court Judges conducted a review of the use of such orders. After searching the Department of Corrections' data base on offenders who were convicted in 1986 of a single crime and sentenced to some form of probation, the council reported that restitution was imposed in fewer than seven percent of the nine types of cases involving children.
The nearly $42.7 million appropriated by the General Assembly to the judicial branch for FY 1988 amounted to a 9.2 percent increase over FY 1987 appropria-

tions. The new appropriation included $675,656 to fund first-time programs or program enhancements: $383,000 for the superior courts to fund investigator positions under the district attorneys in 15 of the 45 circuits; $150,250 to the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education to sponsor training for the Magistrate Courts Training Council and to fund travel expenses; $60,000 for the Supreme Court to implement a computerized docket; and $10,000 for the Judicial Council to continue its pilot case-by-case reporting project.
The legislature declined to approve initial funds requested by the Georgia Indigent Defense Council ($1,979,923), Executive Probate Judges Council ($8,527) and Superior Court Clerks Training Council ($8,995).
The judiciary's share of the entire state budget rose from 0.72 percent in FY 1987 to 0.74 percent in FY 1988. FY'87 judicial branch funds decreased by 0.2 percent ($74,682) as the result of a temporary decrease in the employer's costs for health insurance, but

Judicial Branch Budget Units: FY 1987 Funds Available and Expenditures

FUNDS AVAILABLE

Supreme Court

Court of Appeals

Superior Courts

Juvenile Courts

Institute of Continuing
Judicial Education

Judicial Council

Judicial Qualifications Commission

Total

General Appropriations Supplemental Appropriations Governor's Emergency Funds Total State Funds Federal Funds Other Funds
Total Funds Available

$3,305,545 -108,766 7,000 3,203,779 0 529,898
$3,733,677

$3,784,560 119,383 0
3,903,943 0
67,592
$3,971,535

$30,713,828 -111,802 10,000
30,612,026 133,239 473,235
$31,218,500

$207,411 20,133 10,000
237,544 376,718
2,053
$616,315

$308,334 10,000 0
318,334 8,539
48,904
$375,777

$711,905 -3,690 0
708,215 18,477 28,817
$755,509

$105,292 0 0
105,292 0 0
$105,292

$39,136,875 -74,742 27,000
39,089,133 536,973
1 '150,499
$40,776,605

EXPENDITURES
Personal Services Regular Operating Expenses Travel Publications and Printing Equipment Purchases Computer Charges Real Estate Rentals Telecommunications Per Diem, Fees & Contracts
Total Expenditures

$2,727,476 167,641 26,351 87,872 51,665 307,496 194,843 27,101 142,389
$3,732,834

$3,409,837 76,565 33,015 32,208 71,964
140,280 149,717
28,440 14,440
$3,956,466

$29,521 ,675 462,510 469,239 43,830 52,414 104,967 71,449 32,493 252,798
$31,011,375

$215,559 227,629 18,637 7,781 5,275 60,209 4,781 6,460 69,785
$616,116

0 56,352
0 47,149
566 4,616
0 0 267,051
$375,734

478,372 41,495 10,009 52,007 4,552 32,038 22,410 7,562 98,445
$746,890

0 8,751
0 478
0 0 748 864 73,214
$84,055

$36,352,919 1,040,943 557,251 271,325 186,436 649,606 443,948 102,920 918,122
$40,523,470

3

supplemental funds were granted for selected projects. These included computerization projects in the Court of Appeals and judicial administrative districts, administrative costs for the Council of Juvenile Court Judges' Purchase of Services program and reimbursement of superior court judges' travel expenses by the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education.

At the Governor's Conference on Juvenile Justice in November 1986, Chief Justice Thomas 0. Marshall urged participants to continue their work for improvements in the state's fast-growing juvenile justice system. He proposed several immediate goals which emphasized needed systemic coordination and development.

P.L

E.

14th Annual Report

These goals identified the components of the model juvenile justice system and the roles each would adopt. They include: 1) community-based treatment programs for nonviolent offenders, 2) community involvement and commitment to treatment programs for young offenders, 3) an agency for planning, establishing and monitoring a statewide juve-

'1
I

JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF GEORGIA
Georgia Judicial Districts
CIRCUIT BOUNDARY

4

FY1987

nile justice policy, 4) alternative programs for status and minority offenders, 5) a statewide system of full-time juvenile court judgeships and 6) state-funded mandatory continuing education to assure minimum skill levels and to promote professionalism among juvenile justice practitioners.
Also during the past year, the chief justice actively served as chairman of the 48-member state commission coordinating Georgia's ongoing participation in the celebration marking the bicentennial of the U.S. Constitution. The commission encouraged municipal and county leaders to initiate local events and stressed an increase in awareness of our constitutional heritage. Emphasis was placed on educating Georgia citizens about the history, development and meaning of the national Constitution.
At mid-year, Judge A. W. Birdsong, Jr., assumed office for a two-year term as chief judge of the Court of Appeals, replacing Judge Harold R. Banke. Shortly after election to the post by his colleagues, the new chief judge revealed plans for streamlining ap-

peals procedures through the use of settlement conferences.
Throughout FY'87, local jurisdictions employed unique approaches to solve existing problems. Fulton County's superior court completed the first year of a pilot alternative dispute resolution project for which panels composed of three attorneys hear civil cases involving damage claims of $25,000 or less. In an attempt to relieve overcrowding in the county jail, the same court ran additional criminal trials during January and February of 1987, and it sought federal grant funds for video arraignment.
The Superior Court of DeKalb County utilized a closed circuit television arraignment to eliminate security risks involved with transporting jail prisoners. The DeKalb County court also instituted a two-day, one-trial jury impanelment system on January 1, 1987, and tried "backloading" (probation with an attached jail sentence) as an alternative sentencing method. Hart County superior court began scheduling arraignment hearings as soon as possible after indictment in an ef-

fort to speed the legal process and reduce paperwork. Cobb County superior court judges expanded DUI sentencing options by designing a court operated drug and alcohol awareness program andrequiring community service or attendance at various other pro-
grams.
Counties took advantage of available federal block grant funds from the United States' Bureau of Justice Assistance, disbursed by the Governor's Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, to finance first-time projects beginning in FY'88. Many grant recipients used funds to install or augment computerized systems for managing criminal cases in superior courts. Five juvenile courts planned to implement computerized docketing systems, which would provide access to the statewide juvenile information management system. Two state courts used funding to automate their records systems, and a magistrate court was able to secure funds for holding preliminary hearings by use of a closed circuit television hook-up linking the judge in the courtroom with a jailed defendant.

5

J,.

...

14th Annual Report

Georgia Court System: July 1, 1987

I

SUPREME COURT

I

7 justices

I

Jurisdiction:

Appellate jurisdiction over cases of

constitutional issue, title to land, validity of

and construction of wills, habeas corpus,

extraordinary remedies, convictions of

capital felonies, equity, divorce, alimony,

election contest.

Certified questions and certiorari from

Court of Appeals.

Capital felonies. Constitutional issues. Title to land. Wills, equity and divorce.

I
COURT OF APPEALS (3 divisions) 9judges Jurisdiction: Appellate jurisdiction over lower courts in cases in which Supreme Court has no exclusive appellate jurisdiction.
I
SUPERIOR COURT (45 circuits) 135judges Jurisdiction: Exclusive jurisdiction over cases of divorce, title to land, equity. Exclusive felony jurisdiction. Misdemeanors, felony preliminaries. Jury trials.

Counties with population over 150,000 where probate judge is attorney practicing at least seven years. Jury trials.

STATE COURT (63 courts) 85 judges: 35 full-time, 48 parttime; 2 full-time associates. Jurisdiction: Civil law actions except cases within the exclusive jurisdiction of superior court. Misdemeanors, traffic, felony preliminaries. Jury trials.

I
JUVENILE COURT (159 courts) 51 judges: 11 full-time, 40 parttime (2 state court judges serve as part-time juvenile court judges). Superior court judges serve in counties without independent juvenile courts. Jurisdiction: Deprived, unruly, delinquent juveniles. Juvenile traffic. No jury trials.

I I
PROBATE COURT (159 courts) 159judges Jurisdiction: Exclusive jurisdiction in probate of wills, administration of estates, appointment of guardians, mentally ill, involuntary hospitalizations, marriage licenses. Traffic in some counties. Truancy in some counties. Hold courts of inquiry. Issue search warrants and arrest warrants in certain cases.

MAGISTRATE COURT (159 courts) 159 chief magistrates and 285 magistrates; 37 also serve probate, juvenile, civil or municipal courts. Jurisdiction: Issue search and arrest warrants, felony and misdemeanor preliminaries. Civil claims of $3,000 or less, dispossessories, distress warrants, county ordinances. No jury trials.

I
CIVIL COURT (2 courts) 3judges Jurisdiction: Issue warrants. Misdemeanor and felony preliminaries. Civil tort and contract cases under $7,500 for Bibb County; under $25,000 for Richmond County. Jury trials.

I
MUNICIPAL COURT (1 court in Columbus) 1 judge Jurisdiction: Civil law and landlord-tenant cases (civil) under $7,500. Misdemeanor guilty pleas and preliminary hearings. Warrants. Jury trials in civil cases.

I
COUNTY RECORDER'S COURT (4 courts) 8judges Jurisdiction: County ordinances, criminal warrants and preliminaries.

I
MUNICIPAL COURTS (Approximately 390 courts active) Jurisdiction: Ordinance violations, traffic, criminal preliminaries. No jury trials.

6

FY1987

Supreme Court
A s Georgia's ultimate court of review, the Supreme Court exe~ci~es exclusive appellate jurisdiCtion over cases that involve the interpretation of the constitutions of both the state of Georgia and the United States, as well as treaties between the United States and foreign governments. The court ~lso has constitutionally authorIzed power to render the final decision in the state in cases involving (1) imposition of a sentence of death by a superior court, (2) contested elections, (3) validity or construction of wills, (4) equity, (5) land titles, (6) habeas corpus, (7) extraordinary remedies (mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, etc.) and (8) divorce and alimony. Th: court also reviews by certioran cases transferred from the Court of Appeals and decides questions certified to it by that court. In addition, the court answers questions of law from any state or federal appellate court.
Three terms of court, which begin in September, January and April, are held each year. No oral arguments are heard in August or December. In most instances, cases are decided and judgments given during the term in which they were accepted. The state constitution requires that cases must be disposed by the end of the second term of court after filing; otherwise, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed by operation of law. No case has been decided this way in the court's history.
Cases are assigned in rotation t? the sev~n. justices for prepara-
ho~ ?f opmic_ms.. Aft~r writing an
opm10n, the JUstice orculates it to ~he ent~re court for study. Follow~ng ~discussion en bane, the opinIon IS adopted or rejected by the majority of justices. In the event a justice is unable to serve or disqualifies himself from a case, the remaining justices appoint a substitute justice from a superior court to serve.
Although the court nearly always hears cases in Atlanta, it oc-

casionally schedules sessions at other locations in the state such as at law schools in order to educate students in court operations. In April of 1987, the court held a oneday session at Mercer University in Macon.
Jus?ces are elected to staggered Six-year terms in nonpartisan, ~tatewide elections. Any vacanoes on the court are filled by gubernatorial appointment. To qualify for office as a justice, a person must be at least age 30, a citizen of the state for three years, and must have been admitted to the practice of law for seven years.

The justices elect from among their number a chief justice and a presiding justice, whose terms run for four years. As administrative head of the court, the chief justice presides over court conferences and oral arguments and serves as chairman of the Judicial Council, an administrative arm of the court. The presiding justice performs the duties of the chief justice in his absence and is vice chairman of the council.
Law assistants, who must be licensed attorneys, are appointed by each justice to help in the research and preparation of opin-

Supreme Court
5-year trend: total filings/dispositions

1,700

1,600

1,549

- , 1!,488

I

1,500

I
I
!

1' :

' ,I I

'

~

1,400

I

1,353

I

l --

1,300

I

I

* In 1985, the Supreme Court changed its casecount year from administrative court year (SeptemberAugust) to calendar year (January-December). Filings
Dispositions - - -

7

14th Annual Report

ions. A court-appointed clerk, along with clerical assistants, provide support for the court in calendaring and caseload and records management. The court also appoints an official reporter of decisions, who publishes the opinions of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals.
Since one of the powers invested in the Supreme Court is the authority to promulgate orders needed to carry out its jurisdiction, the court has directed several agencies to assist it in administrative matters. Among these are the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education, the Judicial Council/ Administrative Office of the Courts, the State Bar of Georgia and the Office of Bar Admissions.
The Supreme Court's caseload for calendar years 1985 and 1986 is shown at right. Presented on the previous page is a comparison of filings for administrative court years (September 1-August 31) 1983-1985 and calendar years 1985 and 1986. Dispositions are also depicted for years 1983-1986.

supreme courtCase oad 1985 and 1986

Filed Direct appeals (Final) Petitions for certiorari Original petitions/Motions Habeas corpus applications Applications for
interlocutory appeal Applications for
discretionary appeal Certified questions Attorney discipline Judicial discipline
Bar admissions Other TOTAL

1985 595 551 22 125
51
208 12 65 1 7 0
1,635

1986 560 560 25 158
61
166 9
36 0 12 7
1,594

Disposed

1985

O_Qjnions written

388

Affirmed without

opinion (Rule 59)

139

Certiorari applications

Denied

403

Granted

78

Dismissed

42

Habeas corpus applications

Denied

114

Granted

5

Stricken and entered

on general docket

0

Dismissed without prejudice 0

Denied without prejudice

0

Withdrawn

0

Interlocutory applications

Denied

25

Granted

17

Dismissed

3

Transferred to Court

of Appeals

6

Denied without prejudice

0

Vacated and remanded

0

Withdrawn

0

1986 308
125
434 66 24
123 6
2 2 1 2
31 23*
5
3 1 1 1

Discretionary applications

Denied

141

103

Granted

50**

35

Dismissed

3

6

Tranferred to Court

of Appeals

8

7

Dismissed without prejudice 1

0

Remanded

0

1

Denied with direction

0

1

Withdrawn

3

2

Original petitions/Motions

Denied

4

9

Granted

2

2

Dismissed

10

14

Transferred to Court

of Appeals

3

0

Dismissed without prejudice 0

1

Withdrawn

0

1

Attorney and judicial

disciplinary/Bar admis-

sions decided bt_ order

40

33

Other

Transferred to Court

of Appeals

42

44

Dismissed by order

57

31

Remanded by order

8

1

Withdrawn

38

27

Affirmed by order

3

0

Habeas corpus death

sentence set aside by order 1

0

Vacated by order

0

1

Stricken from docket

4

2

TOTAL

1,488 1,353

*One of these applications was partly granted. **One was granted and remanded.

8

F1987

Court of Appeals
F ol~ow_ing approval of a constitutional amendment in 1906, the Court of Appeals was created in 1907 to alleviate some of the considerable caseload burden from the Supreme Court. Recent studies have shown that this court has become one of the busiest appellate courts in the United States. It retains statewide appellate jurisdiction from superior, state and juvenile courts in all cases where exclusive jurisdiction is not reserved to the Supreme Court. Such cases include civil claims for damages, cases involving workers' compensation and criminal cases other than capital felonies. The court may also certify legal questions to the Supreme Court, however, certification is rarely used.
The court consists of nine judges who serve on three panels of three judges each. Under the court's rules, the position of chief

judge is rotated, usually for a twoyear term upon the basis of seniority of tenure on the court. By statutory authorization, the chief judge appoints the three presiding judges who head each panel. All other judges rotate annually among the three panels.
The chief judge is responsible for the administration of the court and together with the presiding judges forms the executive council. Any decision rendered by a division is final unless a single judge dissents, whereupon the case is considered by all nine judges. If, after the full court hears a case, the judges are equally divided as to the verdict, the case is transferred to the Supreme Court.
The judges of the Court of Appeals are elected to staggered, six-year terms in statewide, nonpartisan elections. A candidate for judgeship must have been a practicing attorney for at least seven years prior to assuming office. In

the event of a vacancy on the court, the governor appoints a successor.
The court holds its three annual sessions, which begin in September, January and April, in Atlanta. Cases are always decided by the term after that in which they were docketed; otherwise, a judgment would be affirmed by operation of law. This has never happened in the history of the Court of Appeals.
Court of Appeals. filings and dispositions for calendar years 19771986 are compared in the chart below.

Court of Appeals

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

10-year trend:

total filings/dispositions

I

3,500

3,292

~I312

2,542

2,781
J----"
2,640

----v 2,776

/
2,587

3,000 2,500

2,404

2.r9

2,142
I NA

!-----'r 'T-- ---T--- 1,620

J
1 ,626
~-----"'----

-

1,7f33-

-

1,766
- ..r-.

1,691

1,724

r---

2,000 1,500

Filings Dispositions ----

9

14th Annual Report

Superior Courts

A s Georgia's general jurisdiction trial court, the superior court has exclusive, constitutional authority to preside over felony cases (except those involving juvenile offenders, in which jurisdiction is shared with the juvenile court) and cases regarding title to land, divorce and equity. The superior court also has exclusive statutory jurisdiction in such matters as declaratory judgments, habeas corpus, mandamus, quo warranto and prohibition.
With the exception of certain probate and juvenile matters, the superior court may exercise jurisdiction over other cases concurrently with the limited jurisdiction courts located in the same county. The superior courts are authorized to correct errors made by lower courts by issuing writs of certiorari, and for some lower courts, the right to direct review by the superior court applies.
Located in each of the state's 159 counties, superior courts are organized by judicial circuits, or groups of counties. The 45 circuits vary in size and population, as well as in the number of judges serving them. From one to eight counties comprise the circuits, with the single-county circuits generally located in or near the several large metropolitan areas of the state (see map of Georgia, page 4).
The number of superior court judges per circuit ranges irom one judge in two circuits (Appalachian, Rockdale) to 12 judges in the Atlanta Judicial Circuit. A chief judge, who in most cases attains the position through seniority, handles the administrative tasks for each circuit.
For purposes of administration, the superior court system is divided into ten administrative districts, with boundaries that roughly correspond to those of Georgia's U.S. congressional districts. An administrative judge, elected to two-year terms by the superior court judges of each district, performs executive functions

Superior Courts

FY 1982 FY 1983 FY 1984 CY 1985

5-year trend: total filings/dispositions

I

I

I

I

i

1

I

202,901

r------193,155--189,~.,..,>

CY 1986
I
213,519
4
207,011 -

196,086

:

""1"--194736

II,.---_., I

~

,

w-l-- "183,805 ----+-----r--------

171 448
l

176.491
I

J

I

1

5-year trend:

I

I

I

1451079

civil filings/dispositions :

:

140,803,1

' 133845

' 133695

132 1- ~r ~ ~135,570

~~~~'

!

j-- i '

' --128581

130,195

"120\:;

-----t----t---

113F----i

'

I

5-year trend: criminal filings/ dispositions

5-year trend: average per judge,

L I

total filings/dispositions

----+----r-----+---

1,662

I
1,582-
1
1,533_
I

FY 1982
Filings Dispositions _ _ _

FY 1983

FY 1984 CY 1985 CY 1986

200,000 175,000 150,000
140,000 120,000 100,000
70,000 60,000 50,000
1,700 1,600 1,500

10

F1987

in the district and is assisted by a district court administrator who provides technical assistance for the courts. Administrative judges have statutory authority to use caseload and other information for management purposes and to assign superior court judges, with their approval, to serve temporarily in other counties and circuits as needed.
Superior court judges are elected to four-year terms in nonpartisan, circuitwide races. To qualify as a superior court judge, a candidate must be at least 30 years old, a citizen of Georgia for at least three years and have been

authorized to practice law for at least seven years. Senior superior court judges, who have retired form the bench and attained senior status, may hear cases in any circuit at the request of the local judges or an administrative judge. All judges must fulfill a 12-hour annual compulsory education requirement.
OnJune30, 1987,131 judges were allocated to Georgia's 159 superior courts. Four additional judgeships for the Brunswick, Cobb, Griffin and Gwinnett judicial circuits were created by the 1987 General Assembly, and the new judges were appointed by

Governor Joe Frank Harris for terms beginning with the 1988 fiscal year.
Recent caseload data for the superior courts is presented on the previous page. The four graphs compare total, civil, criminal and average filings and dispositions for fiscal years 1982, 1983 and 1984, and for calendar years 1985 and 1986. Trends in superior court filings and dispositions for the last ten years are depicted below. CY'86 total superior court caseload by circuit and case type is presented in the table on pages 12-13.

Superior Courts
10-year trend: total filings/dispositions

Filings Dispositions

200,000
180,000
160,000 156,105 , '
fF~--+----+----~---+----~--+-~-+---4---~- 140,000
139,173
i

11

CY 1986 Superior Court Caseload (Docket entries)

Circuit
Alapaha Alcovy Appalachian
Atlanta Atlantic Augusta
Blue Ridge Brunswick Chattahoochee
Cherokee Clayton Cobb
Conasauga Cordele Coweta
Dougherty Douglas Dublin
Eastern Flint Griffin
Gwinnett Houston Lookout Mountain
Macon Middle Mountain
Northeastern Northern Ocmulgee
Oconee Ogeechee Pataula
Piedmont Rockdale Rome
Southern South Georgia Southwestern
Stone Mountain Tallapoosa Tifton
Toombs Waycross Western
TOTAL AVERAGE PER JUDGE**

Total Criminal Filed Diseosed

3,235 2,019
956

2,999 1,570
855

2,444 1,827 1,989

7,392 1,797 1,661

604 1,768 2,240

557 1,437 1,968

1,466 1,505 2,354

1,372 1,522 2,458

1,782 943
1,379

2,031 823
1,330

1,275 1,177 1,328

1,083 1,028 1,407

1,577 998
1,608

1,552 915
1,519

951 426 2,212

1,099 398
1,996

1,593 738 726

' 1,605 812 705

1,730 1,272 2,860

1,540 1,265 2,648

1,221 944 921

1,328 924 906

879 810 1,738

898 907 1,644

1,604 692 977

1,523 646 955

3,502 1,779
906

3,609 1,629
748

1,630 1,080
776

1,592 1,120
667

71,441 529

68,440 507

Felony

Filed

Diseosed

1,017

969

711

565

259

241

6,765 590
1,193

6,717 684
1,035

486 962 1,443

448 795 1,265

555 981 1,984

553 1,040 1,858

435

534

421

328

930

893

1,065

874

462

374

318

350

1,437 479 906

1,406 436 876

820

967

273

248

700

744

1,201 581 378

1,179 654 372

742 524 1,086

624 495 1,017

462

516

833

817

516

496

389

376

192

214

395

451

1,235 504 539

1,134 461 519

3,281 442 522

3,388 446 405

275

283

592

596

598

499

40,479 300

39,142 290

*These totals include 5,574 probation revocations not categorized in the six case types. ** Based on 135 superior court judges.

Misdemeanor

Filed

Diseosed

2,200 1,140
648

2,012 837 565

34 1,163
615

30 1,039
445

57

48

754

590

676

582

762

670

310

268

200

430

1,162 419 306

1,312 392 294

1

0

666

605

943

990

12

18

451

411

578

519

23 71 1,486

24 68 1,226

183

217

34

35

256

241

896 674 1,672

824 696 1,529

681

734

23

19

335

340

434 557 1,227

466 632 1,077

178

198

77

74

270

268

0 1,280
313

0 1,126
272

1,259 307 55

1,213 343 45

25,388 188

23,724 176

.....

12

CY 1986 Superior Court Caseload (Docket entries)

Total Civil Filed Disposed

1,318 2,477
976

1,354 2,360 1,095

10,237 2,856 6,861

11,083 2,444 7,113

1,920 2,829 5,744

1,819 3,075 5,840

2,517 3,271 7,670

2,706 3,383 9,191

2,850 1,666 4,075

2,810 1,487 4,739

2,193 2,211 2,144

2,037 2,399 2,553

4,091 2,437 3,091

3,372 2,512 3,684

5,024 1,729 3,028

5,658 1,968 3,584

4,052 2,430 1,577

3,723 2,361 1,681

2,775 1,618 3,408

3,502 1,725 3,386

1,464 1,912 1,545

1,547 2,202 1,417

1,751 919
2,434

2,159 1,542 2,698

3,861 2,282 2,059

3,851 2,025 2,498

7,877 2,733 2,001

9,724 2,910 1,844

1,091 2,651 1,915

1,434 2,527 2,057

135,570 1,004

145,079 1,075

General

Civil

Filed

Disposed

666

686

1,032

975

532

589

4,006 1,170 1,595

4,428 982
1,827

540 1,233 1,537

462 1,398 1,661

1,229 746
1,576

1,374 719
1,559

1,179 880
1,410

1,107 752
2,001

864 1,306
927

795 1,317 1,244

1,598 1,296 1,519

1,279 1,405 1,976

1,621 464 987

1,819 561
1,249

1,465 1,045
598

1,536 1,060
621

1,186 654
2,078

1,401 683
2,103

697 1,054
827

736 1,176
764

790 641 1,030

1,077 1,087 1,252

1,782 1,138 1,005

1,751 988
1,292

1,909 1,335
960

2,395 1,467
832

446 1,175
745

577 1,109
814

52,473 387

56,886 421

Domestic Relations Filed Disposed

652 1,445
444

668 1,385
506

6,231 1,686 5,266

6,655 1,462 5,286

1,380 1,596 4,207

1,357 1,677 4,179

1,288 2,525 6,094

1,332 2,664 7,632

1,671 786
2,665

1,703 735
2,738

1,329 905
1,217

1,242 1,082 1,309

2,493
1 '141 1,572

2,093 1,107 1,708

3,403 1,265 2,041

3,839 1,407 2,335

2,587 1,385
979

2,187 1,301 1,060

1,589 964
1,330

2,101 1,042 1,283

767

811

858

1,026

718

653

961 278 1,404

1,082 455
1,446

2,079 1,144 1,054

2,100 1,037 1,206

5,968 1,398 1,041

7,329 1,443 1,012

645 1,476 1,170

857 1,416 1,243

83,097 616

88,193 653

Total Case load Filed Disposed

4,553 4,496 1,932

4,353 3,930 1,950

17,681 4,683 8,850

18,475 4,241 8,774

2,524 4,597 7,984

2,376 4,512 7,808

3,983 4,776 10,024

4,078 4,905 11,649

4,632 2,609 5,454

4,841 2,301 6,069

3,468 3,388 3,472

3,120 3.427 3,960

5,668 3,435 4,699

4,924 3.427 5,203

5,975 2,155 5,240

6,757 2,366 5,580

5,645 3,168 2,303

5,328 3,173 2,386

4,505 2,890 6,268

5,042 2,990 6,034

2,685 2,856 2,466

2,875 3,126 2,323

2,630 1,729 4,172

3,057 2,449 4,342

5,465 2,974 3,036

5,374 2,671 3,453

11,379 4,512 2,907

13,333 4,539 2,592

2,721 3,731 2,691

3,026 3,647 2,724

207,011 * 1,533

213,519* 1,582

Total Open Caseload
1,357 3,074 1,362
7,794 1,469 8,317
1,207 2,387 2,970
2,675 2,573 4,523
1,866 1,082 3,240
1,594 3,040 1,238
1,979 2,622 2,462
1,590 1,564 3,330
2,784 1,746
691
2,005 1,885 2,959
595 977 919
1,574 866
3,277
812 2,516
982
7,933 2,575 1,790
1,264 1,831 1,512
106,871 792

13

14th Annual Report

State Courts
A 1970 legislative act established Georgia's state court system by designating as such certain existing countywide courts of limited jurisdiction. In counties where they are located, these courts may exercise jurisdiction over all misdemeanor violations, including traffic cases, and all civil actions, regardless of the amount claimed, unless the superior court has exclusive jurisdiction.
State courts are authorized by statute to hold hearings regarding

applications for and issuance of search and arrest warrants and to hold preliminary hearings. These courts may also punish contempt
by fine of up to $500 and I or sen-
tence up to 20 days in jail. The Georgia Constitution grants state courts the authority to review lower court decisions, if this power is provided by statute. Specified in the Uniform Rules for
State Courts, procedures in the state courts generally parallel those of the superior courts.
The General Assembly may establish a new state courts in

counties where none exist by local legislation. The legislature also specifies the number of judges to preside in state courts and whether they shall serve full or part-time. Part-time judges are permitted to practice law, except in their own courts.
In fiscal year 1987, 62 state courts operated in 63 counties. Georgia's only multi-county state court serves both Cherokee and Forsyth counties. Of the 79 judges currently presiding, 31 were fulltime and 48 served on a part-time basis.

State Courts

FY 1976 FY 1977 FY 1978 FY 1979 FY 1980 FY 1981 FY 1982 FY 1983 FY 1984 CY 1985

10-year trend: total filings/dispositions
Filings Dispositions - - -

--~ '

/ ,/' _L__
r ...,.,.,
L/ ~054 33J,8oo
303,119 /
1/
f
267,348
!

/l"""'"''~c.-.-,"

,,0'' 436,669 '

~:~-L:

+

i 398 196 400,426 '

523,394
~

520,580

501,529 , , 48'?,732

'Disposition data unavailable

510,000 460,000 410,000 360,000 310,000 260,000

The State Court of Rockdale County became the state's sixtythird state court July 1, 1987, following action by the 1987legislature. Additional judgeships were also created for the state courts of DeKalb, Gwinnett and Muscogee counties, effective on that same

date. All are full-time judgeships. State court judges are elected
to four-year terms in nonpartisan, countywide elections. Candidates must be at least 25 years old, have practiced law for at least five years and lived in the county for at least three years. If a vacancy occurs in

a judgeship, the governor may fill the office by appointment.
Above is a comparison of total state court caseload for fiscal years 1976-84 and calendar year 1985. CY'87 filings and dispositions are listed in the table below for 13 counties that voluntarily submitted data.

CY 1987* State Court Caseload {Docket entries)

County
Carroll Cobb Colquitt
DeKalb Fulton Habersham
Lowndes Pierce Richmond
Sumter Tift Washington Worth

Misdemeanor Filed Disposed

763 4,004
754

574 4,370
915

5,797 15,373
613

4,156 12,153
571

1,704 267
1,217

1,733 256
1,655

1,007 1,276
367 211

883 1,052
282 176

Traffic Filed Disposed

4,834 54,574
968

3,208 47,008
2,526

5,030 5,878 1,039

3,401 5,878
853

9,461 641
3,417

8,987 641
6,173

1,147 4,606
416 1,658

1,144 3,904
347 1,569

Civil Filed Disposed

N/A 23,061
40

N/A 19,745
34

51,209 42,923
95

45,681 42,404
81

193

155

17

16

355

254

60

55

147

166

11

7

68

63

Total Caseload

Filed

Disposed

5,597 81,639
1,762

3,782 71 '123
3,475

62,036 64,174
1,747

53,238 60,435
1,505

11,358 925
4,989

10,875 913
8,082

2,214 6,029
794 1,937

2,082 5,122
636 1,808

Data is for period 1/1/87 to 9/30/87

14

FY1987

Juvenile Courts
T he express purpose of Georgia's juvenile courts is to protect the well-being of children, to provide guidance and control conducive to a child's welfare and the best interests of the state and to secure as nearly as possible care equivalent to parental care for a child removed from the home.
The juvenile court's exclusive original jurisdiction extends to cases involving delinquent and unruly children under the age of 17 and deprived children under the age of 18. (During the past year, the Court of Appeals ruled that the juvenile court retains jurisdiction over 16-year-olds alleged to have committed a traffic violation, since, among other reasons, such offenses are considered delinquent acts.) Juvenile courts hold concurrent jurisdiction with superior courts in cases involving capital felonies, custody and child support cases and in proceedings conducted to terminate parental rights. The superior court has the authority to preside over adoption proceedings.

These courts administer supervision and probation cases for those persons under 21 who were sentenced for an offense committed before age 17. In addition, the juvenile court has jurisdiction over cases involving enlistment in the military services and consent to marriage for minors and cases that fall under the Interstate Compact on Juveniles.
Cases appealed from the juvenile courts may be heard by the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court, depending on the specific matter, although most go to the Supreme Court.
In 1982, the General Assembly enacted OCGA 15-11-3 to authorize a circuit-based juvenile court system and specify state salary supplements for circuits establishing judgeships on that geographical basis. However, since the legislature has yet to appropriate funds to implement the act, the state's 11 full-time and 40 parttime juvenile court judges who serve in the 62 separate juvenile courts continue to be funded by the individual counties.
In counties or circuits with no separate juvenile court judge, su-

perior court judges hear juvenile cases. Twenty-six referees, who must be admitted to the state bar or have graduated from law school, serve in 32 counties to assist the juvenile or superior court judge with handling cases. Like the other trial courts, juvenile courts adhere to a set of uniform rules concerning procedures.
In most cases, juvenile court judges are appointed by superior court judges of the circuit for a four-year term (an exception is the election of the judge in Floyd County). Judges must be at least 30 years of age, have practiced law for five years and have lived in Georgia for three years. Full-time judges cannot practice law while holding office. State law requires that juvenile court judges participate in one annual continuing education seminar sponsored by the Council of Juvenile Court Judges in conjunction with the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education.
Total juvenile court filings and dispositions are compared below for fiscal years 1977-1984 and calendar years 1985 and 1986. Juvenile court caseload for CY'86 is presented by county in the table on pages 16-18.

Juvenile Courts

FY 1977 FY 1978 FY 1979 FY 1980 FY 1981 FY 1982 FY 1983 FY 1984 CY 1985 CY 1986

10-year trend: total filings/dispositions
f-.
'

I

I

51,l74

I

v/ 41 ,78_}

36 y~ 38,289

'

35,207 34,182

33,905

r---J /;7,244

I

34111

............

;r: /



'

.

:

:

-:
34 281 ,

-

----
34,883 I

_

:

-:t-
33,613

'

-

c.3.2.;~;6;0;-~-

~2,0-9g~'---

32,68
I

2



'

' / 32,823

'I3540s-

29,633 ,
1/

30,451

'

I

I

'

I

28,905

I ' I

I

I

I

I

'

I

I

'
I '

I

I

50,000 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000

Filings Dispositions

15

CY 1986 Juvenile Court Caseload {Number of children)

County
Appling Atkinson Bacon
Baker Baldwin Banks
Barrow Bartow Ben Hill
Berrien Bibb Bleckle
Brantley Brooks Bryan
Bulloch Burke Butts
Calhoun Camden Candler
Carroll Catoosa Charlton
Chatham Chattahoochee Chattoo a*
Cherokee Clarke Cia
Clayton Clinch Cobb
Coffee Colquitt Columbia
Cook Coweta Crawford
Crisp Dade Dawson
Decatur DeKalb Dod e
Dooly Dougherty Douglas
Early Echols Effingham
Elbert Emanuel Evans

Delinquent Filed Disposed

32 25 6
1
183 9
88 365
28
34 731
14
3 38 37
170 61 25
2
101 9
264 187 14
1,158 15

19 25 3
182 6
60 275
22
24 705 14
3 22 29
141 49 20
1 58
7
252 166 12
1,051 13

Unruly Filed Disposed

29

21

3

3

2

1

0

20

20

22

11

105

67

7

4

154

144

6

6

12

5

13

12

44

41

6

6

9

8

5

5

33

18

164

151

77

72

2

1

239

212

3

3

Traffic Filed Disposed

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

2

2

2

23

17

12

12

2

2

1

2

37

37

8

7

147

118

239

77

120

25

472

460

118

116

206

181

6

6

758

667

353

302

278

274

7

3

5

3

1,668 1,446

979

923

658

562

70

72

3

3

6

5

195

130

14

11

8

3

158

153

54

53

32

32

49

48

7

7

182

89

41

6

5

2

14

12

1

1

0

0

41

34

9

8

31

30

39

38

6

6

15

9

6

5

85

52

19

11

4

1

2,400 1,980 1,225

947

361

345

20

20

5

5

23

19

4

4

650

634

67

64

63

61

345

319

168

141

27

25

51

51

4

4

2

2

51

44

7

7

13

12

56

49

4

3

14

13

25

25

1

0

0

12

9

5

4

0

0

Deprived Filed Disposed

20

12

15

3

22

22

5

3

29

29

27

9

130

89

10

10

13

8

138

124

1

1

8

8

13

13

12

10

13

6

6

6

0

0

0

73

70

120

89

27

23

21

21

350

338

8

7

93

44

150

141

5

5

343

303

27

23

423

374

10

11

52

44

26

26

7

7

68

18

26

23

15

11

2

8

38

37

655

665

13

12

102

101

70

52

3

2

4

4

18

18

22

20

Special Proceedings Filed Disposed

Total Caseload Filed Disposed

9

0

90

52

0

0

43

31

2

2

32

28

0

0

7

4

0

0

234

233

9

6

15

11

177

142

154

93

800

590

38

32

54

36

295

214

1,330 1,199

1

16

16

1

18

15

8

7

18

18

81

55

71

59

8

7

237

197

19

18

93

80

10

8

46

37

8

6

7

5

214

151

6

5

15

12

20

14

605

543

21

20

320

288

37

34

146

132

2,040 1,851

27

24

56

32

508

178

16

16

962

914

1

0

12

11

119

1,851 1,546

39

29

136

121

3,864 3,426

89

91

5

5

274

193

9

7

279

271

3

3

67

66

36

21

332

136

2

2

18

15

76

65

91

85

23

23

1

147

101

238

124

4,879 4,061

25

25

3

2

43

37

8

7

890

867

46

38

656

575

10

9

68

66

2

2

3

3

75

67

2

2

80

71

0

0

44

44

0

0

39

33

16

CY 1986 Juvenile Court Caseload (Number of children)

County
Fannin Fayette Floyd
Forsyth Franklin Fulton
Gilmer Glascock Glynn
Gordon Grady Green
Gwinnett Habersham Hall
Hancock Haralson Harris
Hart Heard Henry
Houston Irwin Jackson
Jasper Jeff Davis Jefferson
Jenkins Johnson Jones
Lamar Lanier Laurens
Lee Liberty Lincoln
Long Lowndes Lumpkin
Macon Madison Marion
McDuffie Mcintosh Meriwether
Miller Mitchell Monroe
Montgomery Morgan Murray
Muscogee Newton Oconee

Delinquent

Unruly

Filed Disposed Filed Disposed

13

9

12

7

108

100

16

15

422

319

275

217

73

44

39

18

40

26

11

4

5,789

NA 1,165

NA

35

34

30

29

4

0

0

0

314

311

143

143

165

165

86

86

43

37

1

16

15

4

3

1,146 1,048

506

411

26

20

1

1

234

234

187

186

0

0

0

0

62

52

15

13

49

48

16

15

42

38

9

6

Traffic Filed Disposed

3

1

31

29

10

8

4

0

0

651

NA

0

0

0

0

26

26

16

16

1

1

0

0

890

863

1

78

77

0

0

0

0

2

2

5

4

169

167

68

66

147

146

419

302

377

317

32

30

6

6

1

0

2

2

55

8

6

3

4

1

2

1

5

2

0

0

51

48

12

12

2

2

31

28

0

0

0

0

4

4

2

2

0

0

6

6

1

0

0

49

39

19

17

0

0

64

58

13

13

2

2

27

26

5

4

0

0

127

123

33

32

18

18

72

68

13

13

40

39

304

274

92

85

13

10

5

2

0

0

2

0

8

8

5

4

1

0

178

176

69

69

8

8

21

15

1

0

0

0

36

25

13

11

41

35

50

18

10

4

8

2

8

6

4

1

0

0

69

63

9

8

0

0

12

7

12

7

0

38

30

9

8

3

3

37

31

1

1

104

102

0

0

57

56

14

14

3

3

7

5

6

6

0

0

101

95

17

14

2

2

102

100

55

51

3

3

1,169 1,003

569

463

207

177

237

236

105

102

36

36

3

5

3

3

0

0

Deprived Filed Disposed

24

9

21

13

95

60

40

25

3

1

824

NA

8

6

0

0

66

66

81

81

11

11

3

3

410

362

41

36

124

124

4

4

26

20

0

0

13

2

55

57

264

208

11

11

44

1

9

8

5

2

7

7

13

13

7

7

0

0

27

26

8

8

27

27

15

15

43

38

8

2

7

1

35

33

5

0

1

9

7

10

4

15

13

1

41

34

3

3

15

17

22

20

12

11

22

19

48

47

457

375

267

262

2

7

Special Proceedings Filed Disposed

Total Case load Filed Disposed

2

2

54

28

9

6

185

163

41

23

839

627

4

1

160

87

9

9

63

40

357

NA 8,786

NA

8

8

81

77

0

0

4

0

0

550

546

20

20

368

368

1

1

57

51

0

0

23

21

165

145

3,117 2,829

3

1

72

59

7

7

630

628

0

0

4

4

8

6

111

91

1

1

68

66

2

2

71

52

11

11

450

447

35

20

1,127

877

1

1

21

20

13

0

122

13

3

0

19

11

12

8

82

72

0

0

38

35

4

4

23

23

4

4

18

18

3

3

71

59

1

1

107

100

0

0

40

38

9

9

214

209

10

10

150

145

11

8

463

415

0

0

15

4

1

1

22

14

0

0

290

286

0

0

27

15

0

92

72

11

2

88

33

1

0

23

11

3

3

96

87

1

1

27

16

34

34

125

109

3

1

45

37

0

0

120

120

6

6

120

99

5

4

30

26

6

6

148

136

9

9

217

210

189

162

2,591

2,180

79

75

724

711

0

1

8

16

17

CY 1986 Juvenile Court Caseload (Number of children)

County
Oglethorpe Paulding Peach
Pickens Pierce Pike
Polk Pulaski Putnam
Quitman Rabun Randolph
Richmond Rockdale Schley
Screven Seminole Spalding
Stephens Stewart Sumter
Talbot Taliaferro Tattnall
Taylor Telfair Terrell
Thomas Tift Toombs
Towns Treutlen Troup
Turner Twiggs Union
Upson Walker Walton
Ware Warren Washington
Wayne Webster Wheeler
White Whitfield Wilcox
Wilkes Wilkinson Worth

Delinquent Filed Disposed

20

13

162

156

30

22

20

6

19

15

14

13

88

79

29

23

20

19

0
28 8
1,165 126 6
45 17 230
35 8 171

0 24
6
1,058 126 6
44 8 230
9 5 84

5

4

0

0

30

30

2

1

72

67

32

30

143

133

238

221

54

54

4

4

25

21

666

660

56

30

25

15

0

7

57

57

121

120

335

333

221

152

2

2

49

44

71

70

2

2

13

13

12

10

372

361

3

1

8

8

14

11

82

78

* Data not submitted by clerk of court. '* Disposition data not submitted.

Unruly Filed Disposed

2

2

80

76

1

1

5

2

2

2

4

3

41

32

5

4

0

0

0

0

5

4

1

1

374

367

74

74

2

0

8

8

2

2

78

78

20

0

2

2

37

22

1

0

0

3

3

0

21

21

4

4

32

27

48

43

2

2

1

1

3

2

85

84

3

4

0

0

0

0

10

10

83

83

125

125

92

65

0

0

8

8

26

26

0

0

12

12

0

0

259

257

0

0

2

1

0

0

18

17

Traffic Filed Disposed

0

0

9

8

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

1

0

0

38

30

102

102

0

0

4

4

0

0

0

0

26

17

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

3

2

32

32

1

1

0

0

2

2

0

0

7

7

0

0

0

0

1

1

6

6

43

43

70

70

27

24

0

0

0

0

2

2

1

1

0

0

0

0

108

102

0

0

1

1

4

4

2

2

Deprived Filed Disposed

12

6

40

33

32

22

44

39

15

5

9

8

31

20

1

0

1

7

7

18

18

177

5

73

73

16

12

13

12

10

7

165

163

24

17

1

1

54

30

5

5

2

2

22

22

0

0

4

0

23

23

44

42

22

20

51

51

1

1

2

2

116

111

3

4

18

14

3

13

39

39

70

63

195

195

87

16

4

4

7

6

82

82

2

2

6

6

4

4

182

177

7

7

3

3

8

5

7

3

Special Proceedings Filed Disposed

Total Case load Filed Disposed

3

1

37

22

16

16

307

289

0

0

64

46

1

1

71

49

3

3

39

25

2

2

29

26

12

7

172

138

2

2

37

29

22

21

0

0

1

1

6

6

48

42

1

28

26

10

8

1,764 1,468

35

35

410

410

0

0

25

19

0

0

66

64

1

1

30

18

38

38

515

513

1

80

27

1

12

9

13

7

301

160

2

2

13

12

0

0

2

2

2

2

57

57

3

3

6

4

9

8

106

96

1

0

63

59

6

6

257

240

3

2

312

287

0

0

107

107

0

0

8

8

7

5

37

30

9

9

883

871

0

0

62

38

12

4

55

33

8

9

12

30

0

0

112

112

22

22

339

331

43

33

768

756

71

27

498

284

0

0

6

6

10

10

74

68

4

4

185

184

1

1

6

6

0

0

31

31

3

3

19

17

45

45

966

942

0

0

10

8

12

12

26

25

1

0

27

20

8

8

117

108

18

Probate Courts
L ocated in each of Georgia's 159 counties, the probate court exercises exclusive original jurisdiction in the probate of wills, the administration of estates, the appointment of guardians and the involuntary hospitalization of incapacitated adults and other dependent individuals. If provided by local statute, probate judges may perform county governmental administration duties, serve as election superintendent, appoint persons to fill public offices, administer oaths of office, issue marriage licenses, hold habeas corpus hearings or preside over criminal preliminary hearings. Probate courts may also hear traffic cases and try violations of state game and fish laws, unless there is a demand for a jury trial, in which instance a case would be transferred to the superior court.
As of July 1, 1986, in counties with a population greater than 150,000 and where the probate judge has practiced law for at least seven years, a party to a civil case has the right to a jury trial if so asserted by a written demand with

the first pleading. Appeals from such civil cases may be to the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals, depending on the particular matter.
Probate court judges are elected to four-year terms in countywide, partisan elections. A candidate for office must be at least 25 years of age, a high school graduate, aU. S. citizen and a county resident for at least two years preceding the election. In counties with a population over 100,000, persons must fulfill further qualifications, including reaching the age of 30 and practicing law for at least three years or serving as clerk of the probate court for a minimum of five years.
If a vacancy occurs in a probate judgeship, state law requires that most counties hold a special election within 10 days. Until the new judge takes office, the chief judge of the state or city court or the clerk of the superior court serves a probate judge. In counties with a population between 200,000 and 250,000, the superior court judges may appoint a successor. A chief clerk who meets the qualifications for office may temporarily assume office upon

the death, resignation, incapacity or inability of a judge to serve.
Newly elected or appointed judges must compete an initial training course in probate matters. In order to receive retirement credit, all judges are required to attend annual continuing education courses and seminars sponsored by the Executive Probate Judges Council and conducted by the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education. The council is a state agency composed of probate judges charged with the responsibility of advising the Institute on matters concerning continuing education for probate judges. (The council receives no state appropriation, but the members are reimbursed for expenses associated with meetings.)
A comparison of total criminal filings and dispositions for those probate courts exercising criminal jurisdiction is presented below for fiscal years 1976-1984 and calendar year 1985. CY'87 data voluntarily submitted by 75 probate courts exercising civil jurisdiction and by 38 probate courts exercising criminal jurisdiction are presented in the tables on pages 20-22.

Probate Courts
10-year trend: total criminal filings/dispositions

FY 1976

FY 1977

FY 1978

FY 1981 FY 1982

200,000

180,000

~J

-----t- -145,799

152,888

I

119.613

116:972-

-1/-:_,.c_-----1- - - - 1 - - - - - - + - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - - L

115,717
j
I

160,000
140,000
I- 120,000 I 100,000

'Disposition data unavailable Filings Dispositions - - -
19

CY 1987* Probate Court Civil Caseload {Docket entries filed)

County
Atkinson Bacon Banks Barrow Ben Hill
Bibb Bleck ley Brantley Bryan Butts
Candler Charlton Cherokee Clarke Clayton
Clinch Cobb Coffee Colquitt Cook
Coweta Crawford Crisp Dawson Decatur
DeKalb Dougherty Douglas Early Echols
Emanuel Fannin Fayette Floyd Forsyth
Fulton Glynn Grady Gwinnett Habersham
Hall Haralson Harris Jackson Lanier
Laurens Lee Liberty Lowndes Mitchell
Morgan Muscogee Oglethorpe Paulding Pickens

No AdminAdmin- istration istration Necessary

6

1

9

2

9

1

9

6

7

4

58

13

1

4

6

5

8

1

5

3

9

1

4

2

21

7

47

9

62

21

5

1

97

40

18

8

9

13

7

0

11

8

2

0

10

8

5

5

0

3

133

99

19

7

22

8

6

0

0

0

46

29

11

3

2

5

38

16

36

5

286

242

44

9

12

5

62

27

12

3

36

14

23

0

6

5

15

5

2

10

13

4

2

50

3

44

14

5

3

4

3

139

21

5

7

14

2

8

4

Probate Common Solemn

1

11

2

9

0

15

34

39

18

330

0

17

1

13

0

20

0

36

0

12

0

5

9

108

13

131

10

214

1

13

22

614

2

46

1

60

0

19

3

68

0

14

1

40

0

12

2

9

134

758

9

164

0

78

0

28

0

2

7

98

2

17

0

22

11

174

194

177

1,171

10

131

1

32

8

274

2

48

5

175

0

38

2

38

2

57

0

11

8

69

0

15

0

25

6

125

0

33

4

21

14

367

0

24

50

2

24

Guardianship
9 7 14 19 7
76 3 5 17 12
9 7 31 55 205
3 156
12 9 5
16 3 9 10
2
296 74 47
1 0
40 4 8 32 48
824 50 9 146 14
36 10 10 18 4
20 16 72 26 8
3 184
5 21
2

Year's Support
3 2 4 3 4
25 2 4 1 3
0 2 12 11 53
5 56
5
8
13 0
1 0 0
111 5 22 0 0
3 8
2
14 7
99 24 4 34 2
19 3 4 13 0
6 0 4 12 0
2 50
4 7 2

Hospitalization
6 9 0 34 10
128 0 0 15 6
3 4 17 69 85
0 92
0 15 18
40 0 17 6 0
175 68 17 13
0
90 0
1
168
0
25 87 21 58 26
42 30 0 14 6
40 0 26 24 0
15 68 3
0
27

Habeus Corpus
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 9 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0

Licenses Marriage Pistol

51

46

91

29

55

40

165

78

127

38

1,216

119

83

82

78

46

48

66

106

54

47

4

1,014

4

465

233

525

151

1,823

474

50

14

3,460

922

248

78

298

51

116

33

271

98

45

51

160

49

53

56

63

21

4,122 866 614 51 3

1,087 214 238 23 1

239

450

79

54

125

42

537

112

1,095

792

5,444 585 144
2,337 161

1,823 232 34 738 40

669

214

231

120

140

97

214

100

35

13

233

107

77

34

464

40

808

182

102

45

69

16

1,659

241

60

37

293

103

91

78

Total Civil
134 160 138 349 237
1,984 192 158 176 225
85 1,042
903 1,011 2,947
92 5,462
417 464 199
528 115 295 147 100
6,925 1,426 1,046
122 6
1,002 178 207
1,102 2,178
10,091 1,172
271 3,684
308
1,210 455 302 438 72
506 149 684 1,241 196
137 2,743
145 491 238

20

CY 1987* Probate Court Civil Caseload (Docket entries filed)

Countz:
Pike Putnam Quitman Rockdale Seminole
Spalding Stewart Telfair Terrell Thomas
Tift Towns Turner Union Walker
Washington Webster Wheeler White Worth

No AdminAdmin- istration istration Necessarz:

0

2

7

3

4

0

11

20

3

5

17

12

4

0

7

0

3

2

14

6

9

5

5

13

4

6

3

13

15

6

2

0

0

0

2

5

3

12

4

Probate Common Solemn

0

20

4

23

0

3

9

71

0

21

105

1

10

6

9

1

20

3

95

58

1

14

0

27

0

14

8

129

3

31

3

0

4

0

26

0

43

Guardianshie
1 5 0 57 2
31 1 2 8
16
15 7 15 9
57
7 0
7 14

Year's sueeort
0 2 0 7 0
12 0 2 0
4 1 2 2 18
2 0 0 3 5

Data is for period 1-1-87 to 9-30-87.

Hospitalization
0 10
1 10
44 0
21 0
327
28 0 2 0
36
9 0 0 7 8

Habeus C o r e us
0 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0

Licenses Marriase Pistol

72

32

84

38

19

9

411

209

603

21

457

131

30

0

67

34

57

45

356

57

290

85

38

61

51

20

88

85

197

66

131

38

17

20

36

7

83

61

149

52

Total Civil
127 176 36 796 667
810 46
148 136 875
495 128 134 207 539
229 41 50
195 287

21

CY 1987* Probate Court Criminal Caseload ~Docket entriesl

Count;t
Atkinson Bacon Banks
Barrow Ben Hill Bleckley
Brantley Butts Charlton
Cook Crawford Crisp
Dawson Echols Fannin
Fayette Floyd Haralson
Harris Laurens Lee
Morgan Oglethorpe Paulding
Pickens Pike Quitman
Seminole Stewart Telfair
Terrell Towns Turner
Union Walton Webster
Wheeler White

Misdemeanor Filed Dis~osed

0

0

37

30

62

70

0

0

31

27

0

0

90

90

36

36

0

0

60

63

24

30

73

61

107

107

0

110

115

26

26

0

0

43

24

96

114

90

71

29

30

76

87

9

9

25

31

0

0

3

3

67

67

102

134

46

48

34

33

0

0

65

59

0

0

77

70

32

32

0

8

7

10

0

0

Traffic

Filed

Dis~osed

430

430

461

516

813

783

1,188 513 502

1,247 491 502

655 291 1,519

658 291 1,707

2,987 885
2,365

3,453 442
2,478

600

600

36

37

583

709

1,458 4,205 1,861

1,458 3,922 1,879

1,540 3,676
781

1,749 3,626
825

3,658 322 814

4,046 309 701

1,015 90
257

1,015 90
258

701

737

495

547

994

938

824 188 1,734

813 189 1,864

473 2,280
352

423 2,519
357

895

875

317

317

Total Caseload

Filed

Dis~osed

430

430

498

546

875

853

1,188 544 502

1,247 518 502

745 327 1,519

748 327 1,707

3,047 909
2,438

3,516 472
2,539

707

707

37

37

693

824

1,484 4,205 1,904

1,484 3,922 1,903

1,636 3,766
810

1,863 3,697
855

3,734 331 839

4,133 318 732

1,015 93
324

1,015 93
325

803

871

541

595

1,028

971

824 253 1,734

813 248 1,864

550 2,312
352

493 2,551
365

902

885

317

317

*Data is for period 1/1/87 to 9/30/87.

14th Annual Report

22

FY1987

Magistrate Courts
Astatewide system of magistrate courts was constitutionally created in 1983 to replace justice of the peace, small claims and other similar courts. A chief magistrate, who may be assisted by one or more magistrates, presides over each of the 159 magistrate courts in the state.
Magistrate court jurisdiction encompasses civil claims of $3,000 or less; trials for county ordinance violations; applications for and issuance of arrest and search warrants; preliminary hearings; issuing summonses, dispossessory writs and distress warrants. Magistrates may grant bail in cases where the setting of bail is not exclusively reserved to another court, administer oaths and issue subpoenas, as well as sentence and fine for contempt up to ten days imprisonment and/or $200.
No jury trials are held in magistrate court, and cases involving county ordinance violations in which the defendant submits a written request for a jury trial are

removed to superior or state court. The superior and state courts preside over appeals from judgments of magistrate courts as well.
In addition to hearing cases, duties of the chief magistrate include assignment of cases, setting of court sessions, appointment of other magistrates (with the consent of the superior court judges) and deciding disputes among other magistrates. Minimum compensation for chief magistrates and magistrates is fixed by statute. Unless otherwise provided by local law, the number of magistrates in addition to the chief is set by majority vote of the county's superior court judges.
Chief magistrates are either appointed or elected in partisan, countywide elections to serve for a term of four years. Terms for other magistrate judges run concurrently with that of the chief magistrate who appointed them. The authority to appoint a replacement if a vacancy occurs in the office of chief magistrate usually resides with a circuit's superior court judges.

To qualify for office, candidates must reside in the county for at least one year preceding their term of office, be 25 years of age and have a high school diploma or its equivalent. New magistrates, unless they are active members of the state bar, must complete an initial40-hour course for certification and all magistrates must satisfy an annual 20-hour continuing education requirement. The Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council formulates the curricula for the seminars and sets the standards for certification, and the training courses are coordinated by the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education.
As provided by law, judges of other limited jurisdiction courts may also serve in the capacity of magistrate in the same county. At the end of FY'87, 30 probate judges, two civil court judges, two juvenile court judges and one municipal court judge also served as chief magistrate or magistrate of their respective counties.
Fiscal year 1987 magistrate court caseload is presented on pages 24-26 for 148 counties submitting data.

23

FY 1987 Magistrate Court Caseload (Cases filed)

County
Appling Atkinson Bacon* Baker
Baldwin Banks Barrow Ben Hill
Berrien Bibb Bleck ley Brantley
Brooks Bryan* Bulloch Burke
Butts Calhoun Camden Candler
Carroll Catoosa Chatham Cherokee
Clarke Clay Clayton Clinch
Cobb Coffee* Colquitt Columbia
Cook Coweta Crawford Crisp
Dade* Dawson* Decatur DeKalb
Dodge Dooly Dougherty* Douglas
Early Echols Effingham Emanuel
Evans Fannin Fayette Floyd
Forsyth* Franklin Fulton Gilmer
Glascock Glynn Gordon Grady
24

Warrants Issued
1,152 201 184 112
2,045 274
2,319 1,950
1,033 7,270
470 197
442 270 3,310 1,333
904 120 1,826 345
2,788 1,547 7,746 4,044
10,490 101
6,485 177
12,113 2,496 2,324 1,349
900 2,121
253 1,933
220
272
1'146 17,849
888 512 5,954 3,500
379 57
532 1,262
488 604 1,249 5,141
943 732 14,440 552
34 4,252 1 '791
634

Bond and Commitment
Hearings

County Ordinances Filed Disposed

239

2

2

0

0

0

71

0

0

95

0

0

384

0

0

165

0

371

1

0

194

0

0

2 3,071
142 23
219 70 84 40

0

0

0

0

0

0

13

13

5

5

0

0

3

2

0

0

132

7

7

3

0

0

584

148

84

123

1

0 328 3,518
95

1

0

0

0

0

0

2

1

2,123 56
8,748 0

0

0

0

0

130

116

0

0

1 ,511 538 0 51

1,460 0 0
164

1,470 0
117 139

85

0

0

442

246

285

22

7

6

520

0

0

169 88
337 17,289

0

0

22

19

0

0

667

607

0

0

0

24

0

0

192

0

0

704

235

205

3

0

0

27

0

0

19

2

2

562

117

117

164

0

0

164

2

2

408

90

94

621

21

21

0 207 19,127 222

0 0 24,499 1

0 0 8,645 1

0

0

0

144

55

87

517

0

0

107

0

0

Civil Claims Filed Disposed

Other Civil Cases Filed Disposed

635

622

140

140

197

210

77

77

135

141

64

64

85

52

23

23

2,570 188 704
1,261

0 1,869

186

46

488

442

978

932

1,869 46
442 932

446 2,187
232 181
565 150 1,662 614

326 1,731
221 181
372
151 2,263
686

202 1,023
106 19
166 37
580 255

202 1,023
106 19
166 37
580 255

393 149 681 277
1,286 379
5,802 957

348 165 427 210
977
223 3,225
554

122 73
321 93
973 190 8,475 965

122 73
321 93
973 190 8,475 965

1,368 36
1,707 451

1 '142 42
1,138 125

1,867 6
6,800 218

1,867 6
6,800 218

2,274

1,789

0

0

775

585

402

402

1,915

553

760

760

971

675

337

337

338

406

171

171

1,910

1,258

827

827

102

91

24

24

779

747

587

587

31

58

6

6

300

218

26

26

1,058

89

576

576

3,383

2,668

124

124

283 312 2,831 870

154 220 2,526 435

118 121 1,040 1,339

118 121 1,040 1,339

468

468

213

213

25

23

3

3

420

396

86

86

910

910

347

347

473 224 481 2,388

159 235 423 2,388

110 23
217 1,590

110
23
217 1,590

407 433 4,347 326
44
1,718 855 752

0 295 1,641 354
27 482 516 583

0 141 57,757 54
8 1,422
355 369

0 141 57,757
54
8 1,422
355 369

Total Filings
1,929 475 383 220
6,484 509
3,466 4,143
1,681 10,480
808 410
1,178 457
5,555 2,202
1,426 342
2,976 716
5,048 2,116 22,023 5,968
13,725 143
15,122 846
15,847 3,673 4,999 2,821
1,409 5,104
386 3,299
257 620 2,780 22,023
1,289 945
9,825 5,944
1,060 85
1,040 2,636
1,071 853
2,037 9,140
1,350 1,306 101,043
933
86 7,447 3,001 1,755

Total Hearings and Dispositions
1,003 287 276 170
2,253 397
1,301 2,104
530 5,825
469 236
762 258 2,929 981
609 241 1,416 427
1,950 741
15,218 1,615
5,132 104
16,802 343
4,770
1,525 1,430 1,202
662 2,812
143 1,854
233 351 1,002 20,688
272 365 3,758 2,683
684 53
503 1,936
433
424
1,142 4,620
0 643 87,170 631
35 2,135 1,388 1,059

FY 1987 Magistrate Court Caseload (Cases filed)

County
Greene Gwinnett* Habersham Hall
Hancock Haralson Harris Hart
Heard* Henry Houston Jackson
Jasper Jeff Davis Jefferson Jenkins*
Johnson Jones Lamar Lanier
Laurens Lee Lincoln Long
Lowndes Lumpkin Macon Madison
Marion McDuffie Mcintosh Meriwether
Miller Monroe Morgan Murray
Muscogee Newton Oconee Oglethorpe
Paulding Peach Pickens Pierce*
Pike Polk Pulaski Putnam
Rabun Randolph Richmond Rockdale*
Schley Seminole Spalding Stephens
Stewart* Sumter Talbot Taliaferro

Warrants Issued
687 4,744 1,793 4,812
227 570 448 683
183 1,779 6,016 1,291
304 1,048
999 379
361 542 565 367
2,626 278 139 227
5,238 593 765 645
136 1 '172
360 357
212 561 728 899
0 3,461
214 213
1,487 1 '156
641 163
280 1,306
317 351
563 331 11,033 1,438
176 316 3,186 1,580
207 2,467
0 35

Bond and Commitment
Hearings
577 1,973
457 3,405
104 33 113 161
0 1,443 2,019
147
128 1,036
297 16
8 0 61 30
3 38 49 68
1,894 378 100 500
61 119 105 78
0 68 91 17
0 732
0 39
327 1,064
0 47
186 130 103 464
3 40 2,063 866
144 71 1,074 246
10 2,085
0 0

County Ordinances Filed Disposed

0 0 109 967
0 3 70 0
19 324
0 4
0 0 0 0
0 0 2 0
0 2 39 2
102 0
110 61
0 10 0 3
0 0 12 262
0 290
1 0
9 52
0 0
0 17 0 0
2 0
8,444 333
0 0 15 0
0 0 0 0

0 0 117 772
0 0 49 0
19 311
0 10
61 0 0 0
0 0 2 0
0 2 39 4
99 0 30 72
0 10
0 6
0 0 12 262
0 281
1 0
8 46
0 0
0 3 1 0
1 0
8,444 305
0 0 15 0
0 0 0 0

Civil Claims Filed Disposed

529 1,526
578 1,631

362 1,733
324 1,205

618

608

295

133

315

323

392

205

96 1,175 1,252
582

72
753 1,174
654

193

134

532

536

718

718

463

358

249

185

531

309

319

268

177

169

1,078 301 326 90

1,082 254 287 63

4,338 322 347 396

1,835 258 349 281

74

79

1,100

812

311

260

329

294

290

117

446

371

394

350

625

624

697 1,295
168 167

274 1,221
133 149

439

291

471

268

255

140

54

42

272

132

651

326

266

170

1,009

652

238 219 7,079 564

210 219 5,693 428

75 301 2,037 477

50 266 1,327 558

42

37

814

888

163

0

35

0

Other Civil Cases Filed Disposed

243 2,698
194 1,319

243 2,698
194 1,319

304

304

112

112

121

121

134

134

35 524 1,272 243

35 524 1,272 243

73

73

314

314

493

493

277

277

99

99

93

93

307

307

36

36

823

823

122

122

125

125

9

9

2,921 105 197 85

2,921 105 197 85

36

36

406

406

56

56

91

91

44

44

214

214

134

134

229

229

3

3

612

612

79

79

48

48

210

210

162

162

46

46

12

12

41

41

263

263

58

58

322

322

42 20 6,187 633

42 20 6,187 633

28 119 2,287 168

28 119 2,287 168

22

22

789

789

12

12

0

0

Total Filings
1,459 8,968 2,674 8,729
1 '149 980 954
1,209
333 3,802 8,540 2,120
570 1,894 2,210 1 '119
709 1 '166 1 '193
580
4,527 703 629 328
12,599 1,020 1,419 1 '187
246 2,688
727 780
546 1,221 1,268 2,015
700 5,658
462 428
2,145 1,841
942 229
593 2,237
641 1,682
845 570 32,743 2,968
279 736 7,525 2,225
271 4,070
175 70

Total Hearings and Dispositions
1,182 6,404 1,092 6,701
1,016 278 606 500
126 3,031 4,465 1,054
396 1,086 1,508
651
292 402 638 235
1,908 416 500 144
6,749 741 676 938
176 1,347
421 469
161 653 587 1,132
277 2,846
213 236
836 1,540
186 101
359
722
332 1,438
256 279 22,387 2,232
222 456 4,703 972
69 3,762
12 0
25

..

;:

14th Annual Report

l

I I
FY 1987 Magistrate Court Caseload (Cases filed)

Bond and

County

Civil

Other

I
Total

Warrants Commitment

Ordinances

Claims

Civil Cases

Total Hearings and

County

Issued

Hearings

Filed Disposed

Filed Disposed Filed Disposed Filings Dispositions

Tattnall Taylor Telfair Terrell
Thomas Tift Toombs Towns

606 233 779 674
2,724 3,054 3,621
235

62

2

2

549

541

142

142

1,299

747

41

0

0

233

56

30

30

496

127

88

0

0

344

334

193

193

1,316

615

289

0

0

335

353

165

165

1 '174

807

810

5

8

2,011

1,425 1'120

1 '120

5,860

3,363

357

0

0

989

852

424

424

4,467

1,633

9

0

0

1 '192

942

488

488

5,301

1,439

14

0

0

43

38

7

7

285

59

Treutlen Troup Turner Twiggs

284 2,145
518 276

29

0

0

82

85

47

47

413

161

138

0

0

3,665

3,151 2,817

2,817

8,627

6,106

206

0

0

223

224

90

90

831

520

116

0

0

154

162

40

40

470

318

Union* Upson Walker Walton

534 996 1,097 1,894

11

0

0

324

0

0

608

50

51

359

274

287

120

119

11

11

665

141

691

28

347

347

2,034

699

671

316

328

328

2,146

1,303

854

737

928

928

3,950

2,311

Ware Warren Washington Wayne
Webster Wheeler White Whitfield

2,954 124
1,018 1 '181
39 205 558 5,491

838

112

106

739

0

0

0

233

14

0

0

1,046

57

0

0

401

672

545

114

111

715

420

247

214

545

4,350

111

468

420

2,484

214

1,796

2,161 225
1'149 518

36

0

0

37

58

5

5

81

99

32

0

0

173

134

34

34

412

200

266

0

0

321

320

60

60

939

646

617

0

0

2,021

2,159 1,243

1,243

8,755

4,019

Wilcox

131

Wilkes

319

Wilkinson

223

Worth

871

38

0

0

160

163

79

79

370

280

53

1

341

321

208

208

869

583

5

14

14

389

348

119

119

745

486

106

0

0

396

357

218

218

1,485

681

TOTAL

252,494

95,938 39,624 23,499

116,840

84,540 132,321 132,321 541,279

336,298

*Partial submissions for FY 1987. Note: 133 counties submitted data for all quarters.
148 counties submitted data for some quarters. 11 counties did not submit reports.

Other Courts
A long with the two appellate and five classes of trial courts, approximately 400 local courts form the Georgia court system. Several special courts and numerous (390) courts serving incorporated municipalities operate under a variety of names with varying jurisdiction.
Originally created by statute or constitutional provision, certain special courts have limited civil and criminal jurisdiction throughout the county. Such courts in-
26

elude the civil courts located in Bibb and Richmond counties and the Municipal Court of Columbus (see court organizational chart, p. 6). Special courts authorized to exercise criminal jurisdiction only are the county recorder's courts of Chatham, DeKalb and Gwinnett counties and the consolidated government of Columbus-Muscogee County.
At the local level, Georgia has courts of incorporated municipalities that try local traffic offenses, exercise criminal jurisdiction of magistrate courts and may have concurrent jurisdiction over cases

involving one ounce or less of marijuana. Although first established under various names (city courts, mayor's courts, municipal courts, police courts, recorder's courts), these courts were redesignated as municipal courts by the 1983 state constitution. (An exception is the City Court of Atlanta, which retains its original name.)
Qualifications of judges and terms of office in municipal courts are set by local legislation.

FY1987
Judicial Agencies

Judicial Council
of Georgia
S ince its creation by statute in 1973, the Judicial Council has served the Georgia judiciary and citizenry as the state-level judicial planning agency by coordinating administrative efforts for and recommending improvements in the state judicial system. An administrative arm of the Supreme Court since 1978, the council advises the legislature and the governor on the need for additional superior court judgeships by evaluating circuit caseloads and circumstances. The council also responds to legislative directives and individual requests for studies and initiates projects to generate efficiencies in the state's courts.
Twenty-four representatives of the appellate and trial courts serve on the Judicial Council. The Supreme Court's chief justice and presiding justice act as the chairman and vice chairman, respectively. The chief judge and another member of the Court of Appeals, the five presidents and presidents-elect of the superior, state, juvenile, probate and magistrate court councils and the 10 superior court district administrative judges complete the council's membership.
The full council meets at least twice each year, as it did in December 1986 and June 1987, to consider its committees' recommendations regarding specific studies and ongoing projects. It oversees the activities of the Administrative Office of the Courts and the Board of Court Reporting (see following pages).
The Judicial Council entered into a $69,000 contract with the 10 judicial administrative districts for district personnel to conduct the 1985 calendar year casecount in the summer of 1986. Raw data obtained by the districts was analyzed by the Administrative Office of the Courts and the results were submitted to the council for evaluation in regard to seven requests for additional superior court judgeships.

In considering added judgeships, the Judicial Council seeks to achieve a balanced and equitable distribution of superior court caseload in order to promote speedy and fair trials of citizens' cases. Endorsements are based on information that clearly and convincingly depicts the necessity of additional manpower, and, as a matter of policy, the council does not recommend the creation of new part-time judgeships or additional circuits. The council compares a requesting circuit's situation, in terms of weighted caseload, average filings, jury trials, open caseload, population and days of senior judge assistance, to that of the remaining circuits. Following evaluation of these factors in 1986, the council recommended to Governor Harris and the General Assembly the creation of five superior court judgeships in the Appalachian, Brunswick, Cobb, Griffin and Gwinnett judicial circuits.
In response to requests from three state courts, the council evaluated caseload data for DeKalb, Muscogee and Richmond counties and found that the relevant statistics justified the creation of additional judgeships for each of the courts. Asked to make recommendations regarding the abolition of certain limited jurisdiction courts and the addition of superior court manpower in the Augusta and Blue Ridge circuits, the Judicial Council disapproved both requests.
Prior to the casecount conducted at the close of FY 1987, the council was asked to study other judgeship related issues in relation to calendar year 1986 caseload data. A State Representative from the Brunswick Judicial Circuit petitioned the council to examine simultaneously with a legislative study committee the feasibility of dividing that five-county circuit into two separate circuits. Requests from a state senator and a chief judge for a council recommendation concerning the consolidation of the Houston County state and superior courts were received. In addition, officials from

27

14th Annual Report

the Flint and Stone Mountain circuits requested a new superior court judgeship for each of their courts.
The Judicial Council prepared for the CY'86 caseload study by altering its casecount methodology. It was determined that state appropriations for casecounting would be designated for superior courts only. The amended methodology included the following substantive changes:
1) both the state and probate courts would be requested to voluntarily submit cascload data tallied by the individual courts;
2) probation revocations would be counted as criminal, rather than civil, cases and would be obtained directly from the Department of Corrections rather than from dockets;
3) independent motions (previously a separate civil case type) would be reclassified as either domestic relations, civil or criminal cases;
4) civil disposition categories would be collapsed into pretrial, bench trial and jury trial, thereby eliminating more detailed pretrial categories;
5) criminal case disposition categories would be classified as bench trial acquittal or conviction, jury trial acquittal or conviction, guilty plea, cash bond and nontrial;
6) traffic cases would be counted as misdemeanors (new weightedcaseload values would be assigned for misdemeanor cases);
7) juvenile cases would be counted by field survey only where computerized reporting information was incomplete from a juvenile court served by a superior court judge; and
8) contested garnishment and outgoing uniform reciprocal enforcement of support cases would be counted as disposed on the date filed.
Also during the year, a Judicial Council committee completed a study requested by the 1986 Georgia House of Representatives to identify existing child support enforcement programs and collection methods among the state's courts and executive branch agencies and to suggest legislation which would correct inefficiencies
28

and duplication of resources. Throughout the year, the committee reviewed applicable state and federal laws governing child support enforcement and related reports, received testimony from state and national experts and examined data on enforcement programs collected from state child support receiver offices and neighboring states.
The Judicial Council reviewed the committee's report to consolidate child support collection in one office under the supervision of a court officer under contract with the Office of Child Support Recovery, networked into its state-level computer system. The committee concluded that such consolidation and structural simplification would provide comprehensive data on all enforcement orders and eliminate more costly and less effective collection present in the fragmented system. The committee also endorsed a stronger role for the judicial branch in child support recovery. Final action by the Judicial Council was deferred until its December, 1987, meeting.
The council's Electronic Data Processing Committee continued toward its objective of defining data elements and formats for the electronic storage of information concerning judicial workload in the superior courts. At the close of the fiscal year, the committee recommended minimum standards for civil and criminal data elements for consideration by courts when installing any computer system.
Also at the end of the year, the council considered its case-by-case committee's recommendation that the council seek state funding to expand its pilot case reporting project to the 15 counties in the ninth judicial district and toreplace federal funds in the six counties where the project was already operational. It adjusted its case reporting methodology and changed certain reporting requirements to further assist judges and clerks participating in the project.
In attending to its administrative duties, the Judicial Council approved the 1987 calendar year

magistrate court judges' training curricula proposed by the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education and the Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council, with an amendment to include a short segment on search warrants. The council also selected new attorney and court reporter members for the Board of Court Reporting and clarified the per diem compensation for court reporters regarding certain proceedings in criminal trials.
Administrative
Office of the Courts
T he Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) provides budget, research and management information services for the state court system and serves a liaison function through its administrative activities in connection with national-level and other state-level judicial agencies. The AOC also serves as staff to the Judicial Council, working closely with the chairman, the chief justice of the state Supreme Court.
The AOC's administration/ operations division performs fiscal support services that involve coordination of the judicial branch appropriations request as well as serving as accounting officer for eight other judicial agencies. The fiscal office handles tasks associated with accounts payable, cash management, purchasing, inventory control, personnel records and financial reporting for these agencies.
In FY'87, the AOC fiscal section managed 62 separate funding sources comprising all or part of five of the seven budget units in the judicial branch (see table, p. 2). These funding sources included 25 state fund allocations, 22 federal grants and 15 fee or other revenue accounts.

FY1987

Effective July 1, 1986, the AOC converted its payroll system, which covers 60 employees in six judicial agencies, to the state's Personnel Accounting and Control System (PACS). Inquiries concerning a conversion of its financial accounting system to the Financial Accounting and Control System (FACS) led to the conclusion that it would not be cost effective due to the multitude of budget units and funding sources involved. As a result, the AOC continued to upgrade its existing system.
At the request of the Council of Superior Court Judges, the AOC conducted a fringe benefit analysis of the superior courts. The study concentrated on benefits available to superior court judges, judicial secretaries and law clerks, and evaluated the three benefit categories, including employer-paid programs, payroll reductions (tax deferred or exempt programs) and payroll deductions (after-tax programs). The analysis, an informative summary of benefit options, was presented at the superior court judges' summer seminar.
Another function of the administration/operations division is the promotion of communication and the exchange of information among judges, court support personnel and public and private judicial organizations. This objective is accomplished primarily through the production of a variety of informational publications, including the Georgia Courts Journal, a periodical which informs readers of changes in court procedure, judicial personnel appointments and elections, recent legislation, local and national court management activities and judicial process events. In FY'87, four Journals and one index were published and distributed to 3,000 local, state and national officials.
The AOC prepared and distributed eight weekly issues of the Judicial Legislative Log, a digest of court-related legislation, to more than 800 judges, county officers and court administrative personnel. The 1986-87 Georgia Courts

Directory, which contains address information for Georgia county, state and federal judicial branch officials, was provided at no cost to judicial branch personnel and was made available at cost to attorneys and other interested persons.
The AOC produced the judiciary's Thirteenth Annual Report on the Work of the Georgia Courts and coordinated approximately 150 printing projects for the AOC and other judicial agencies. Ten issues of the Public Relations Digest-abstracts of news and feature items about the judiciary- were compiled and circulated to Judicial Council members to gauge public opinion about court activities and to identify matters of concern to the council. Seven press releases were issued to the state's print and electronic media during the year to announce Judicial Council action regarding the creation of additional superior court judgeships.
The AOC coordinated therevision of the Georgia Probate Court Benchbook, working closely with a committee of the Council of Probate Court Judges and the fiduciary committee of the State Bar of Georgia to update and reformat the 1979 edition. Staff assistance was also provided in the printing and dissemination of new uniform probate court forms which were mandated effective July 1, 1987.
The AOC's research/court services division is responsible for gathering statistical, financial and other information on the judicial work of the courts in order to distinguish current and anticipated needs and to propose recommendations for improvement. The AOC responds to requests for studies from the General Assembly and the judicial community and initiates projects to fulfill its legislatively prescribed duty to serve the courts (sec list of AOC duties, p. 30).
Each year the primary research effort is aimed at supervising the collection of cascload and other data on the trial courts' work. Through a contract with the judicial administrative dis-

tricts, the AOC expended $69,000 on manual counting of calendar year 1985 cases in the superior and juvenile courts. New casecounting strategies were designed to incorporate changes necessitated by a switch from a fiscal to calendar year count period, and casecount forms were revised accordingly. Both the Delphi and Ratio weighted caseload systems were adjusted for the new methodology. CY 1985 data submitted by district personnel was audited and analyzed in terms of judicial workload and presented to the Judicial Council to formulate recommendations on the need for seven additional superior court judgeships, three state court judgeships and the consolidation of the state and superior courts in three counties.
The AOC generated reports of district, circuit and county caseloads in response to individual requests for caseload information and compiled open caseload reports for the 45 superior court circuits for CY 1985. Following an analysis of the number of open cases, the AOC estimated average processing times for each judicial circuit and notified judges of their circuit's current rate of case dispositions.
As a result of the 1986 amended casecounting methodology, the state and probate court judges' councils requested AOC assistance in introducing caseload reporting systems for their courts. AOC staff designed separate methodologies, procedures manuals and collection forms and assisted in the implementation of quarterly reporting systems in both courts.
The AOC continued to work with the Council of Magistrate Court Judges on its caseload reporting system as required by a uniform magistrate court rule that became effective July 1, 1986. The initial system was evaluated and redesigned to simplify collection procedures and eliminate difficulties encountered during the first year of operation, and to comply with statutory changes in magistrate court jurisdiction. Following
29

14th Annual Report

Duties of the Judicial Council/ Administrative Office of the Courts
1) Consult with and assist judges, administrators, clerks of court and othe~ officers and employees of the court pertaining to matters relating to court administration and provide such services as are requested
2) Examine the administrative and business methods and systems employed in the offices related to and serving the courts and make recommendations for necessary improvement
3) Compile statistical and financial data and other information on the judicial work of the courts and on the work of other offices related to and serving the courts, which shall be provided by the courts
4) Examine the state of the dockets and practices and procedures of the courts and make recommendations for the expedition of litigation
5) Act as fiscal officer and prepare and submit budget estimates of state appropriations necessary for the maintenance and operation of the judicial system
6) Perform such additional duties as may be assigned by the Judicial Council
7) Prepare and publish an annual report on the work of the courts and on the activities of the Administrative Office of the Courts
8) Receive grants from any source, public or private, and expend funds and perform services in accordance with the terms of any grant
9) Prepare, publish and distribute, from time to time, studies and reports relating to the administration of justice, impose reasonable charges for such reports where appropriate on either an individual or subscription basis and retain any proceeds of such charges
10) Provide clerical, technical, research or other assistance to individual courts to enable them more effectively to discharge their duties
11) Enter into contracts as necessary to perform its other duties

these changes, the AOC revised the case data forms and instructional manual and distributed them to the 159 magistrate courts. Computerized caseload reports were generated for each magistrate court submitting data, and the AOC produced quarterly totals and distributed reports to the chief magistrates.
Initial processing of data on superior court cases in six counties was begun in FY 1987 under a pilot case reporting system

funded by a justice assistance block grant. AOC research staff received civil and criminal case information from superior court clerks' personnel in Bartow, Fayette, Hall, Lumpkin, Pulaski and Rockdale counties and compiled and analyzed data via computer. Reports were generated according to data periods specified by the participating courts on a monthly basis. The AOC also began to investigate the feasibility of integrating the

30

project's data clements with two software applications presently available to Georgia courts for computerizing court functions.
By comparing results of two previous surveys on the use and applications of computers in Georgia courts, the AOC studied the increase of computer applications in the state's 45 superior courts from 1984 to 1986. The AOC demonstrated that the number of computers in use almost doubled, with the total number of computer applications rising nearly 300%. In updating its survey of court computer usage, the AOC determined that the development of less expensive, high capacity hardware and software specially adapted to the state's court system particularly impacted the degree of automation.
As mandated by a 1986 House of Representatives resolution, the AOC and the Judicial Council studied child support enforcement powers and programs in Georgia courts and agencies. Along with the judicial administrative district personnel, the AOC surveyed caseloads and child support collections from selected child support receivers in Georgia and contacted neighboring states' court administrative offices to obtain information on support enforcement. A comprehensive analysis of significant problems in enforcement procedures and organization structure was prepared. It stressed that the most pressing need is for a statewide computer system capable of relaying current information about cases and collection and disbursement of support funds.
Also during the year, the AOC assisted the Judicial Council's Electronic Data Processing Committee in evaluating superior court information systems and assessing superior court clerks' reporting requirements. The AOC identified agencies to which superior courts are required to report case data and interviewed agency personnel to determine reporting requirements, data definitions and computer file structures. Additionally, data elements needed for an auto-

F1987

mated superior court trial management system were identified.
Ongoing responsibilities in disseminating court management information were met throughout the fiscal year. The AOC conducted initial mail and follow-up telephone surveys of court officials for its annual salary survey and forwarded requested information on the results. Five statewide records retention schedules drafted by the AOC were later approved by the State Records Committee to assist local officials in managing court records. The AOC assisted in the drafting and approval of micrographic standards for Georgia agencies which are applicable to all state agencies and local governmental bodies engaged in microfilming public records. Legislative tracking services were provided to trial court judges' councils during the 1987 session of the Georgia General Assembly to summarize proposed measures affecting their courts.
During the past year, the AOC continued to provide secretariat services to six agencies and organizations. As required by statute, staff assistance was provided to the Board of Court Reporting and the Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council. The AOC's judicial liaison officer also worked with the Council of Probate Court Judges' bylaws committee, assisted the Executive Probate Judges Council in the development of training curricula, staffed meetings of the Superior Court Clerks Training Council and aided the Council of Magistrate Court Judges in the development of their benchbook.
The AOC coordinated the judging of the national high school essay contest held in conjunction with the celebration of the bicentennial of the U.S. Constitution. Judging of 417 essays proceeded through three rounds and used persons from the state academic, civic, judicial and legal communities as judges. The essays were entered by Georgia students on the topic: "The Constitution: How Does the Separation of Powers Help Make It Work?"

Also during the year, AOC Director Robert L. Doss, Jr. served as president of the national Conference of State Court Administrators and, by virtue of that position, on the board of the National Center for State Courts.
Board of Court
Reporting
T he Board of Court Reporting operates under authority of the 1974 Georgia Court Reporting Act to assist the state's judiciary by insuring proficiency in the practice of court reporting and encouraging high standards of professionalism among reporting practitioners. The board also investigates complaints filed against court reporters and administers disciplinary action when warranted. The Judicial Council appoints board members and governs official court reporting fees through regulation and adjustment of an established fee schedule.
The board conducts examinations twice annually as part of a qualifications procedure to certify court reporters in the state. Both freelance and official court reporters are required to achieve certified status or to obtain a temporary permit from the board or from a judge to practice.
The exams consist of a skills test in one of three elected methods of takedown, including machine or manual shorthand or Stenomask. Reporters must pass the "B" test, which involves dictation, transcription and a written exam, to become certified. The optional "A" test provides certified reporters an opportunity to upgrade their professional status. Individuals who pass the initial examination submit a renewal fcc by April1 of each year to remain certified.
At the two tests administered in FY'87, 26 percent of the 265 persons taking the "B" test passed and were certified, with two reporters upgrading their certificates from "with backup" to "without

backup." One reporter of 19 successfully completed the "A" test. Additionally, the board issued 13 "B" certificates to Georgia reporters recognized by the National Stenomask Verbatim Reporters Association and the National Shorthand Reporters Association, since affiliation with these groups verifies that the reporter has been tested at or above the board's "A" level and passed.
As of June 30, 1987, there were 746 active certified court reporters in the state. Nine reporters held temporary judicial permits, while 59 were working on temporary board permits. The board issued 90 new temporary permits during the year.
The board disposed of three formal complaints in FY'87. One case was dismissed due to lack of probable cause, one was withdrawn by the complainant prior to a full hearing and a hearing was held on a third case which resulted in a resolution between the parties and the complaint being withdrawn.
A 13-page revision to the Certified Court Reporters Handbook was distributed in the spring of 1987 to all certified reporters and to judicial personnel who requested a copy. Recent changes to the board's rules and regulations were included in the revision, along with updates to opinions of the board, opinions of the Judicial Council or the Attorney General and updates to state statutes and case law.
In response to requests for opinions, the Judicial Council ruled that the $75 per diem paid to official reporters includes all takedown in a criminal case, provided the court orders that all voir dire, opening statements, closing arguments and additional motions be recorded. Attorney General's Opinion 87-17 interpreted Official Code of Georgia 9-11-30(e) as placing no limitations on the type of changes that may be made by a witness before signing a deposition.
The Georgia Certified Court Reporter's Association, the profession's alliance for education
31

14th Annual Report

and training, held two seminars during the year, in Macon and at St. Simons Island. Topics discussed at the fall seminar included the unified appeal procedure, a session on lawsuits filed against court reporters and the benefits of errors and omissions insurance. The spring seminar included presentations on the state council of notaries public and ways toreduce tax liabilities under therevised federal tax laws.
Seven members comprise the Board of Court Reporting and include four certified court reporters, two representatives from the State Bar of Georgia and one representative from the judiciary, who has historically been a superior court judge. The members serve two-year terms of office, and the Judicial Council appoints new members to fill any vacancies which may occur. Each person is required to have accumulated at least five years' professional experience to qualify for membership. In addition to the seven members, the director of the Administrative Office of the Courts serves as secretary, and the clerk of the board performs staff functions.
Council of
Juvenile Court Judges
(Annual Report for fiscal year 1987, as required by OCGA 15-11-4.)
T he Council of Juvenile Court Judges is composed of all judges of the courts exercising jurisdiction over juveniles. Current membership includes 51 part or full-time juvenile court judges, 57 superior court judges exercising juvenile court jurisdiction and 27 juvenile court referees. Staff of the council provide assistance for judges and local court staff regarding matters of court administration, court services, probation and intake standards and procedures, foster care review, uniform
32

dockets, automation, uniform court rules and other issues relating to the special functions of juvenile court. Judges and referees receive yearly certification training at seminars conducted by the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education.
State funds for administrative costs of the council's Purchase of Services for Juvenile Offenders program were initially appropriated by the Georgia General Assembly during its 1987 session. The program, now operating in 91 counties, makes funds available to local juvenile courts to establish community-based resources for children whose cases have been informally adjusted or probated. Federal funds from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention make it possible for the council to reimburse participating counties for the costs of services such as: counseling, diagnostic testing, tutoring, restitution programs, transportation and residential programs. In FY'87, $210,340 was expended by local juvenile courts to extend services for status offenders and delinquents. Some 1,800 children were referred to the program by their local juvenile court judge.
A 40-page handbook entitled Restitution: An Alternative Program for Your Juvenile Court was published and distributed by program staff to judges, court service workers and probation officers across the state. The handbook includes sections on the types of restitution, developing and implementing plans in the community, as well as the text of Georgia laws governing restitution and sample forms used in restitution programs.
Sponsorship of a second Permanency Planning Conference and initial publication of a quarterly newsletter for judicial citizen review panel members were the major achievements of the Permanent Homes for Children project in FY'87. Citizen review panels are operative in 21 counties where volunteers evaluate foster care plans for children under the court's jurisdiction and make recommendations to the judge con-

cerning a permanent plan for the child's future.The conference, designed for judges, panel members and protective services workers, was held on November 14, 1986, in Atlanta. Some 220 persons from around the state attended and were addressed by Chief Justice Thomas 0. Marshall of Georgia's Supreme Court.
A grant from the National Council of Family and Juvenile Court Judges made possible the publication of the Permanent Homes newsletter which is distributed to over 700 panel members, judges and legislators. In addition, the grant is funding staff positions for an administrative assistant and data entry clerk.
Three volunteer positions have also been established through VISTA (Volunteers In Service To America) to work with panels in five counties. These persons serve as court coordinators and develop resources for children and families under the guidance of the juvenile court judge.
A grant from the Juvenile Justice Office of the Department of Community Affairs and funds from the Governor's Intern Office provided for three law intern positions with juvenile courts. Students worked with the courts in Chatham, Glynn and Walton counties for a period of ten weeks. Tasks were assigned by judges with emphasis on direct service to children involved with the juvenile court. Law internships enable students to gain an inside view of the operations and unique problems of juvenile court.
The juvenile information system was expanded from the original seven counties to include four new counties-Floyd, Houston, Newton and Richmond-during FY'87. Plans are underway to incorporate Chatham, Gwinnett, Muscogee, Rockdale, Ware and Whitfield counties to bring the total number of automated counties to 16. In compliance with the Uniform Rules of Practice and Procedure for the juvenile courts, all counties must submit uniform docket and complaint forms to the council either as hard copy or by

FY1987

electronic means. Software for use on the juvenile information system has been developed by contractors and staff of the Administrative Office of the Courts and includes five statistical programs and six statewide uniform forms. Plans are underway to provide an operator's manual for counties on the automated system.
The council has participated with the Division of Youth Services for the past nine years in the joint training project for juvenile justice personnel. The project utilizes juvenile justice professionals from various probation and treatment agencies to offer 25 training workshops during the year. Funds for the training are provided by the federal Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention through the Georgia Department of Community Affairs. The project provided training in skills development, family and individual counseling and other needs of juvenile justice professionals.
Legislation passed during the 1987 session of the General Assembly affecting juvenile courts included a measure requiring parental notification or other proceedings before minors can obtain legal abortions; another bill created the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council to address issues facing the juvenile courts and to develop community-based alternatives for delinquent children; the Senate established a Juvenile Justice Study Committee to study the juvenile justice system and the operation of youth development centers in Georgia.
Also during the year, the Supreme Court adopted revisions of the Uniform Rules of Practice and Procedure for Juvenile Courts to implement laws regarding parental notification of abortion and handling of juvenile traffic offenders. Juvenile courts now accept complaints involving all traffic offenders under the age of 17. Judges are authorized to collect fines and are required to report the disposition of all moving violations to the Georgia Department of Public Safety.

Council of
Superior Court
Judges
T he Council of Superior Court Judges is composed of all superior court judges (135) and senior (retired) superior court judges (37). Its purpose and goals are to effectuate the constitutional and statutory responsibilities conferred upon it by law, to identify and seek solutions to problems common to all judges and to pursue matters of mutual interest in furthering the improvement of justice and the judiciary in Georgia.
During the past fiscal year, the council focused attention on improving public knowledge of the courts. Toward this effort, the council began a rebuilding of communication with attorneys by meeting with the State Bar of Georgia's executive committee and attending the bar members' annual meeting. Through serving on the faculty of the Institute of Government's 15th Biennial Institute for Legislators, council members strove to acquaint newly elected state senators and representatives with the role of the courts in state government.
The council was active in recommending legislation designed to improve the administration of the courts, including House Bill 877, facilitating the involvement of senior judges as well as superior court judges in administrative meetings and mandatory judicial education, and House Bill 338, providing for improved and consolidated circuit law libraries.
The Council's commitment to continuing judicial education was evidenced by the attendance of 113 members at the fal11986 seminar at the Center for Continuing Education in Athens and 118 members at the summer 1987 seminar held at St. Simons Island.
In response to a request from Chief justice Thomas 0. Marshall for assistance addressing the backlog of death penalty habeas corpus cases in the Flint judicial Circuit,

over 20 superior court judges volunteered to serve in this capacity. As a result of council members' participation in this project, the backlog was improved and council leadership is committed to assisting the circuit in eliminating future delay in resolving such cases.
Other council activities and functions for FY 1987 included continued input into the development of child support guidelines as mandated by the Child Support Amendments of 1984 (Public Law 98-378), and increased communication and cooperation with other branches of state government through agencies such as the Governor's Committee on Crime and Punishment, the Georgia Commission on Child Support and the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council.
Georgia Indigent
Defense Council
T he Georgia Indigent Defense Council was created by an act of the state legislature in 1979. The Council is composed of 10 lawyers, one from each of the 10 judicial administrative districts in Georgia, and three laypersons from the state at large.
The council's four statutory purposes and duties are: 1) to administer funds provided by the state and federal governments to support local indigent defense programs; 2) to recommend uniform guidelines within which local indigent defense programs will operate; 3) to provide to local programs and attorneys who represent indigents technical and research assistance, clinical and training programs and other administrative services; and 4) to prepare budget reports and management information required for implementation of the Georgia Indigent Defense Act.
During the past year, the council recommended via the judicial branch budget request that the Georgia Indigent Defense Act be funded at the level of $10 million
33

14th Annual Report

for the 1989 fiscal year. The legislature has not granted appropriations to supplement county indigent defense programs since 1981. The most recent survey conducted by the council estimates that $10 million was spent per annum by the state's 159 counties.
The council held regional meetings throughout the state to explain the Indigent Defense Act, to discuss the present state of indigent defense in Georgia and to provide a forum in which county commissioners, superior court judges, legislators, bar leaders and criminal defense lawyers could discuss the workings of their indigent defense systems. Additional meetings are scheduled during FY'88 to enhance public interest and legislative awareness about the current state of local programs that provide legal representation to indigent criminal defendants.
Georgia
Magistrate Courts
Training Council
(Annual Report for calendar year 1987, as required by OCGA 15-10-134.)
T he Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council supervises continuing judicial education requirements for magistrate court judges by prescribing minimum standards for curricula and criteria for magistrate training. Specifically, the council approves instructor qualifications and issues training certification to chief magistrates and magistrates who satisfactorily comply with established programs.
Nonlawyer magistrates who are newly elected or appointed must attend the first scheduled certification course after assuming office and successfully complete 40 hours of basic training in the performance of their duties. In order to maintain certified status, all magistrates (including those
34

who practice law) must fulfill an annual 20-hour training requirement.
In association with the council, the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education (ICJE) sponsored a twopart, 40-hour seminar and seven 20-hour regional training sessions for magistrates during the 1987 calendar year (see table below). A total of 180 credit hours were administered in certifying 411 magistrate court judges. Six magistrates unable to physically attend the regional training events were authorized by the council to listen to audio tapes and complete the examination to become certified.
For the first time, the council gave certification credit for successful completion of training conducted in Georgia by a national training organization. Thirty magistrates elected to attend a twoweek, nonlawyer course in Athens sponsored by the American Academy of Judicial Education, pursuant to a contract with the council, in lieu of re.gular training and were granted recertified status. Eight were recertified at another ICJE-sponsored program.
In March 1987, ICJE held an orientation course for persons serving as instructors at the eight magistrate seminars. Its objective was to insure consistency in programs, to develop exams and solutions and to assist instructors in methods of presentation. Persons serving as instructors during the year included magistrates, attorneys, law professors and state and superior court judges.

Magistrates attending the initial, 40-hour program took part in a variety of training modules, including a theoretical lecture on the doctrine of inherent powers of state constitutional courts, civil and criminal law and procedure, practical exercises in the issuance of search and arrest warrants, legal research, ethical and administrative practices, contempt of court and video instruction on the fourth amendment. Twenty-hour participants received instruction on criminal and civil procedure, evidence, landlord and tenant, extrajudicial conduct and bad check law. All magistrate court judges were required to complete takehome examinations at the close of each day, with a final exam on the last day.
Participants paid a $125 tuition fee which entitled them to training materials and a selection of legal publications to complement their law libraries. Twenty-hour attendees chose between supplements to the unannotated state code, a magistrate's handbook, a landlord-tenant manual, a law enforcement handbook or titles from an optional book list. New magistrates were able to select either all of the above supplemented manuals or from the same book list.
The council met three times during FY'87-in March, June and October-and conducted two meetings via teleconference toreview and administer its training policy. It decided to seek additional state funds in 1988 to span-

Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council 1987 Seminars

Date

Location

Hours

Attendees

February 1820 March 26-27 May 13-15 May 27-29 June 3-5 June 1719 July 15-17 August 3-4 September 24 September 30--0ctober 2 November 46

Athens

20/40

36

Athens

10

10

Tifton

20

62

Athens

20

56

Athens

20/40

36

Savannah

20

55

Athens

20

54

Athens

20*

22

Marietta

20

46

Forsyth

20

33

Savannah

20

47

rwo-week course sponsored by American Academy of Judicial Education

F1987

or another national level training course and to develop and broadcast by satellite a one-day training workshop for magistrate court clerks, and planned to join with other judicial agencies in presentation of the unified judicial budget. Extra funds were also to be sought to hire a consultant to expand the council's program of instructor training. Later in the year, the council voted to alter its examination procedure to provide for shorter, more frequent tests for a one-year trial period in order to permit beneficial discussion among participants and to help the council better determine the effectiveness of instruction.
Authorized by its enacting legislation to take steps necessary to perform its duties, the training council in FY'87 took action against one magistrate who had continually failed to attend its certification courses. Information regarding this magistrate was forwarded to the Judicial Qualifications Commission, which, after an investigation and subsequent hearings, determined the judge should be removed from office.
In other action, the training council decreased the tuition fee from $125 to $100 for the 1988 training year due to an increased state appropriation. Its appropriation was raised 137% from $38,334 to $91,018 by the 1987 General Assembly.
Institute of
Continuing
Judicial
Education
I n coordinating training programs for judicial branch officials in fiscal year 1987, the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education (ICJE) sponsored jointly with client groups 38 activities serving 1,792 constituents. The Institute reached its immediate goal of extending and improving the techni-

cal aspects of its established basic and continuing judicial education programs by offering its traditional annual calendar of training events, as well as a biannual orientation course for new trial judges and an expanded course for instructor judges of the magistrates' recertification courses.
Several experimental projects were undertaken during FY'87. The first, a telephone survey of lawyers, judges and appellate judges to assess training needs of workers' compensation administrative law judges, resulted in the development of a long-range plan, a basic course and some immediate continuing judicial education programs. The second effort, initiated by the Executive Probate Judges Council, attempted to dovetail ICJE's in-state, semi-annual offering for probate judges with the annual meeting of the National College of Probate Judges in Savannah. A third program involved execution of regional seminars for traffic court (usually municipal court) judges and clerks. A fourth activity enabled faculty in the basic and recertification courses for magistrates to study adult educational instructional design and course development.
Development of computerassisted instruction on evidence law, involving individual or small group use of microcomputers in responding to preprogrammed problems, continued during the year. ICJE installed a unit on character evidence, and a problemdriven evidence instructional program, specifically developed for use with juvenile court judges in FY'86, was conducted. Similarly, a module of instruction on judicial writing first used with state court judges proved to merit wider use, as it was a useful training tool for superior court judges and probate court judges.
Faculty members of Georgia's accredited law schools (Mercer, Emory, Georgia State universities and the University of Georgia) provided valuable public service instructional time to the Institute. Judges performed the bulk of in-

structional duties throughout the year, reemphasizing the collegial, peer enrichment character of continuing judicial education. Superior court judges continued to perform a significant instructional role in the statutorily mandated training for magistrate judges. Throughout the year, at each regional seminar, a local superior court judge conducted the threehour instructional block devoted to hearsay and the use of exceptions to the hearsay rule as aspects of evidence law. In FY'88, state court judges will assume instructional leadership roles in landlordtenant law and judicial ethics.
State-based training comprises ICJE's foremost educational responsibility. (The table at the right lists the Institute's state-based activities performed during 198687, identifying the constituent group served, the course site, the date and the number of attendees for each program.) The mandatory training sessions for magistrates, both the 40-hour basic course and the 20-hour recertification programs, were again conducted to audiences limited to 60 participants. While this necessitated a greater number of course offerings, it facilitated a thorough and relevant learning environment for attendees, provided a more academic climate for instructors and promoted regionalized execution of the curriculum, saving time and travel expense funds.
In FY'87, 100 percent of the 131 active superior court judges met their continuing education requirement, with only a few senior superior court judges failing to participate. Mandatory continuing judicial education for superior court judges, which became effective on January 1, 1986, includes twelve hours of training per year. Every other year, two of these training hours must be devoted to judicial ethics.
The Institute also sponsored persons attending out-of-state training programs held by nationally recognized judicial education agencies. Of 50 applications received in 1986-87 for financial aid to attend nationally-based train-
35

14th Annual Report

ing, 46 were granted some level of funding, while 34 individuals actually took advantage of this assistance. Half of the out-of-state training was approved for attendance at the National Judicial College in Reno, Nevada. Institute funds were used to support the training of 20 superior court judges, two state court judges, six juvenile court judges, five court administrative personnel and one probation supervisor.
The FY'87 state appropriation for the Institute totaled $328,334 and was augmented in the fall of 1986 by a $29,000 grant that permitted ICJE to continue a basic training program for traffic court judges and clerks. Plans were formulated to conduct this program, via satellite transmission from Athens, on a regional basis in six to eight locations throughout the state during the last six months of 1987. Funds for this experimental effort at local/regional programming were awarded from National Highway Traffic Safety Administration monies granted to ICJE through the Governor's Office of Highway Safety.
The past year was the third full year in which the Institute operated with its own part-time
bookkeeperI accounting assistant
on staff, which enabled it to track its expenses on a program basis. For the fourth straight year, no attendee mileage expenses were reimbursed to program participants due to insufficient funding to cover this expense. No adverse impact on participation levels was observed by ICJE to result from this policy.
During FY 1987, ICJE Executive Director Richard D. Reaves served as president of the National Association of State Judicial Educators.
Members of the board of trustees of the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education primarily represent client goups of courts and judicial organizations in the state and include one judge of the Court of Appeals; two members of the Council of Superior Court Judges; one member each of the councils of state, juvenile, probate and
36

Institute of Continuing Judicial Education FY 1987 State-based Instructional Activities

Program

Location Date

Attendees

Traffic Adjudication Traffic Adjudication Traffic Adjudication Summer Seminar for
Superior Court Judges Probate Court Judges-Jury Trials Traffic Adjudication 20-Hour Recertification Course
for Magistrate Judges Traffic Adjudication Traffic Adjudication Fall Corrections Program Tour Traffic Adjudication Traffic Adjudication Independent Juvenile Court
Probation Officers 20-Hour Recertification Course
for Magistrate Judges Juvenile Court Judges Fall Seminar Court Administrators Fall Seminar Superior Court Judges Fall Seminar 20-Hour Recertification Course for
Magistrate Judges Municipal Court Judges Seminar-
Probate Court Judges Fall Seminar Superior Court Clerks Fall Seminar State Court Judges Fall Seminar New Judges Orientation Course 40-Hour Basic Course for
Magistrate Judges (Criminal) Trial Judges Secretaries Seminar Instructor Judges School Superior Court Clerks Spring Seminar Juvenile Court Clerks Seminar Spring Corrections Tour Probate Court Judges Spring Seminar Independent Juvenile Court
Probation Officers 20-Hour RecertificationCourse tor Magistrate Judges Juvenile Court Judges Spring Seminar State Court Judges Spring Seminar
20-Hour Recertification Course for Magistrate Judges
40-Hour Basic Course for Magistrate Judges (Civil)
20-Hour Recertification Course for Magistrate Judges

Dublin

July 8, 1986

13

Augusta July 25, 1986

10

Valdosta July 29, 1986

9

Savannah July 27-30, 1986

129

Savannah July 30-31 , 1986

8

Savannah September 4, 1986

5

Marietta September 3-5, 1986

58

Bainbridge September 9, 1986

5

Macon

September 16, 1986

6

Macon

September 17-19, 1986

7

Marietta

September 18, 1986

9

Marietta

September 22, 1986

3

Unicoi

September 24-26, 1986

77

Athens

October 1-3, 1986

54

Canton

October 20-22, 1986

68

Athens

October 29--31, 1986

24

Athens

October 29--31 , 1986

113

Athens

November 5-7, 1986

33

Savannah November 10-12, 1986

16

Savannah November 12-14, 1986

47

Savannah November 12-14, 1986

121

Unicoi

November 19--21 , 1986

35

Atlanta

December 10-12, 1986

20

Athens

February 18-20, 1987

36

Athens

March 25-27, 1987

68

Athens

March 26--27, 1987

17

Macon

Apri18-10, 1987

167

Macon

April 8-9, 1987

30

Macon

April15-17, 1987

9

Athens

April15-17, 1987

174

Jekyll

May 6--8, 1987

85

Island

Tifton

May 13-15, 1987

67

Savannah May 17-19, 1987

71

St. Simons May 20-22, 1987

36

Island

Athens

May 27-29, 1987

59

Athens

June 3-5, 1987

40

Savannah June 17-19, 1987

63

FY1987

magistrate court judges; one representative of the Superior Court Clerks Association; one member each of the State Bar of Georgia and the Judicial Council; and five ex officio members, including the immediate past chairmen of the Institute's board of trustees and the board of trustees of the Institute of Continuing Legal Education and deans of the state's four accredited law schools. A liaison member representing the Supreme Court and an advisory member also serve on the board.
Judicial
Nominating
Commission
T he Judicial Nominating Commission assists the governor with his duty to appoint highly qualified persons to judicial office by soliciting nominations for judgeships filled by gubernatorial selection. The nominating procedure is often undertaken to fill judicial vacancies, although nominations may also be processed in designating candidates for newly created judgeships.
Certain qualifications must be met prior to consideration of any candidate for judicial office. While the requisites vary according to the type of court, most can didates must meet a residency and age requirement. Judges of appel late and superior courts must have maintained an active membership in the state bar for seven years, and state and juvenile court judges must be admitted to practice law in the state for at least five years. Qualifications for all judges are specified either in the state constitution or in pertinent statutes (see reviews of particular courts, pp. 7-26, for more detail).
The commission begins the se lection process by seeking nominations from local individuals or leaders among the civic and legal communities. The commission members evaluate each candidate based on a questionnaire concern-

ing his or her qualifications and a legal article or brief which the candidate has authored. The nominees are then investigated through interviews with attorneys familiar with them and by personally interviewing the candidates themselves.
The nominating body held meetings on six days in FY'87 to consider candidates for nine judicial offices, including four new superior court judgeships, three new state court judgeships and one state court vacancy and one vacancy in the Civil Court of Richmond County. Since 1973, the commission has acted on a total of 158 judgeships, including:
10 Supreme Court vacancies
12 Court of Appeals vacancies
96 superior court offices
37 state court posts
2 municipal court judgeships
1 civil court vacancy.
Originally created by executive order of former Governor Jimmy Carter and continued in the same manner by succeeding governors, the commission is composed of ten members. Five are persons appointed to serve a term concurrent with that of the appointing governor, and the other five are or have been elected officers of the state bar, including the president, two successive past presidents and the president-elect and president of the younger lawyers section.
Judicial
Qualifications
Commission
T he Georgia Constitution empowers the Judicial Qualifications Commission to respond to inquiries from judges regarding appropriate judicial conduct, to direct investigations into complaints involving members of the state judiciary and, when it deems necessary, to hold hearings concerning allegations of judicial misconduct. Grievances involving judges may be initiated by a writ-

ten, usually verified, complaint of any person or upon the commission's own motion.
Alleged violations of misconduct or protests against judges must be based on one of the seven canons of the Code of Judicial Conduct, last revised March 15, 1984. Grounds for action include 1) willful misconduct in office, 2) willful and persistent failure to perform duties, 3) habitual intemperance, 4) conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice which brings the judicial office into disrepute, and 5) disability which seriously interferes with the performance of judicial duties and which is or is likely to become permanent.
The commission may make an initial inquiry with or without giving notice or other information to the subject judge and may conduct an investigation of the judge's conduct or condition to determine whether formal proceedings should be instituted and a hearing held. Prior to a determination of a formal hearing, the judge is given reasonable opportunity to make an oral or written statement either personally or through counsel. Although the commission may issue subpoenas for witnesses or documents, the judge neither retains the right to call witnesses nor to confront the complainant or other persons interviewed by the commission.
After an investigation, the commission may recommend to the Supreme Court the removal, discipline or retirement of a judge. The Supreme Court makes a final decision whether to accept, reject or modify the commission's recommendation about a particular judge. A 1985 amendment to the constitution further provides that a judge who has been indicted for a felony may be suspended from office, pending final disposition of the case or until expiration of the term of office, whichever occurs first, if the commission concludes that the indictment relates to and adversely affects performance of the judge's official duties.
At its 10 regular meetings in fiscal year 1987, the commission
37

14th Annual Report

Synopses of FY 1987 JQC Opinions

Opinion 86: In the case of spouses appointed before the issuance of Opinion 68 on February 22, 1985, while there is a presumption of impropriety, this presumption is rebuttable, and the employment may be continued so long as it affirmatively appears to be justified on the basis of ability rather than relationship.
Opinion 8 7: A part-time magistrate cannot represent a defendant in the superior court in connection with a warrant issued in his court by another magistrate of the court.
Opinion 88: Opinion No. 88 has been revoked by Opinion No. 99 for the reason that attorneys are not members of the judiciary subject to the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Opinion 89: There is no reason a judge should not serve on the advisory board of a local unit of the Salvation Army provided care is taken by him notto violate any the restrictions and limitations set out in Canon 58.
Opinion 90: (1) It is not inappropriate for a candidate for a nonpartisan judicial office to have in his political literature information concerning his political party affiliation and offices he has held in party organizations.
(2) It is permissible for a candidate for a nonpartisan judicial office to attend partisan political functions seeking the support'endorsement of the individuals present, but not the political party as such.
(3) It is not inappropriate for the campaign committee of a candidate for a nonpartisan judicial office to send letters to registered voters identifying his past political affiliation and offices he has held and services he has performed for the political party and pointing out his and his opponent's voting record in past partisan prirr.aries.
(4) It is not appropriate in a letter from the campaign committee of a candidate for a nonpartisan judicial office to represent that the candidate is qualified, not only because of his experience, training and ability, but also because of his political party affiliation.
(5) Candidates in a nonpartisan judicial election are not prohibited from attending fund-raisers for candidates provided they do not solicit or contribute in any way.
(6) lithe impermissible conduct of a candidate amounts to a violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, a complaint may be filed with the Judicial Qualifications Commission.
Opinion 91: There is no reason why a clerk of a superior court judge should not apply for the part-time position of assistant magistrate in an adjacent county in which he resides.

Opinion 92: It would be inappropriate for a judge to act as a class representative in a class action which involves a private matter in which he and others have sustained an economic loss as distinguished from a public issue class action, such as resulted in Opinion Nos. 22 and 77.
Opinion 93: The issuance of a warrant by a magistrate is a judicial act and a magistrate, in so doing, is subject to all of the provisions of Canon 3C with respect to disqualification.
Opinion 94: Association of a workmen's compensation hearing officer, by an attorney who regularly appears before him, to represent a client in a wrongful death action on a contingent fee basis, where the fee is to be divided in proportion to the time devoted to the case by each lawyer, created an unavoidable appearance of possible impropriety and the opportunity for special influence.
Opinion 95: It is not improper for a judge to act as executrix of her grandfather's will, subject to the restrictions set out in Canon 50.
Opinion 96: It could be inappropriate for a judge to accept, without cost, a title search and opinion from an attorney.
Opinion 97: It would be inappropriate for a magistrate to become a stockholder in a corporation organized to operate a collection agency which would bring actions in his court, even though he would disqualify himself, would be a passive stockholder and would not be involved in active management of the collection agency.
Opinion 98: Itwould not be appropriateforajudgetobeaduespaying member of a plaintiffs or defendants trial lawyers association.
Opinion 99: Opinion No. 88 was revoked for the reason that attorneys are not members of the judiciary subject to the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Opinion 100: Itis not appropriate for the court to have ex parte communications with prevailing counsel with reference to the preparation of proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, but the court may, if it elects to do so:
(a) request counsel tor both parties to submit a proposed findings of tact, conclusions of law and final judgment; or
(b) after the court has reached a decision on all questions at issue, announce its decision to all counsel and request prevailing counsel to draft, serve on opposing counsel, and submit to the court findings of fact, conclusions of law and a final judgment in accordance therewith.

resolved 107 matters of the 123 filed (13 pending from FY'86 and 110 new matters). Sixteen issues were deferred until FY'88.
Eighty-eight complaints were disposed for the following reasons: a) dismissed as frivolous, unfounded, unsupported or appropriate for appeal (65), b) judge privately reprimanded (13), c) no jurisdiction (3), d) no complaint materialized (3), e) judge suspended after indictment (2), f) no violation shown (1 ), and g) failure to provide information (1). The commission held hearings on formal proceedings against two judges and recommended suspension without pay for both, how-
38

ever, these recommendations were not filed in the Supreme Court until after year end.
The known sources of FY'87 complaints were varied and include 61 litigants or their relations, 9 non-litigants, 7 public officials or officers, 6 attorneys and 5 from anonymous individuals.
The commission received 19 requests for advisory rulings during the fiscal year. Fifteen formal opinions and one informal opinion were rendered, while three applications for opinions were denied.
The seven-member Judicial Qualifications Commission operates under procedural rules

revised as of May 1, 1985. All proceedings of the commission, including complaints, conferences, communications and decisions, are confidential, with the exception of notice of a formal hearing, formal hearings, reports recommending discipline and decisions after a hearing when a judge was found not guilty of misconduct.
By rule, the members of the commission include two judges of courts of record appointed by the Supreme Court, three attorneys named by the Board of Governors of the State Bar of Georgia and two citizens selected by the governor. A director and an investigator serve as the commission's staff.

FY1987

Superior Courts
Sentence Review
Panel
Georgia's Superior Courts Sentence Review Panel has operated since 1974 to uphold a defendant's right to have his or her sentence reviewed to determine excessive harshness in relation to other sentences for a similar crime. In comparing sentences, the panel considers the nature of the crime and the defendant's prior criminal record.
Cases subject to the panel's jurisdiction are those sentences totaling five or more years set by a superior court judge without a jury, except cases in which the death penalty is imposed, sentences set in misdemeanor cases and murder cases where a life sentence has been applied. The panel retains the authority only toreduce sentences and is statutorily prohibited from increasing punishments, reducing sentences to probation or suspending any sentence.
The Sentence Review Panel reviews sentences upon application of a defendant who must act within 30 days of the date on which the sentence was assessed by the superior court judge, or after the remittitur from the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court affirming the conviction of the sentencing court, whichever occurs last. The application for sentence review must be transmitted to the panel within 10 days of its filing, along with copies of any presentence or post-sentence report. Both the defendant and the district attorney have the right to present written argument relative to the harshness or justification of the sentence.
A defendant may not file more than one application for review of a sentence, and the panel's action reducing or declining to reduce a sentence is not reviewable. Panel orders relating to an application are binding on the defendant and the superior court which imposed the sentence.

The panel affirmed 2,485 cases and reduced 63 cases in FY'87 for a total caseload of 2,548, an increase of 35 percent over FY'86 and the highest workload ever experienced by the panel. The reduction rate for the year-2.47%was the lowest annual rate in the panel's history.
The cumulative reduction rate decreased further to 5.32% (for all 20,886 cases considered by all panels) in the last quarter of FY'87 from 5.71 at the end of fiscal year 1986. Listed at right is a summary of the panel's caseload for FY'87 along with a 10-year comparison of cases reviewed by the panel.
The Sentence Review Panel meets in two concurrent panels,

each composed of three superior court judges. Panel members are appointed and chairpersons are designated by the president of the Council of Superior Court Judges to serve three-month terms.
A supernumerary member is also appointed for each term and is authorized to substitute for member who cannot attend a meeting or who is disqualified.
An administrative board of three judges maintains continuity among the various panels. The board prepares an annual budget, considers revisions to the panel's procedural rules and supervises the activities of the clerk and staff.

Superior Courts Sentence Review Panel Caseload Summary

FY 1987 Caseload

Cases Cases Cases affirmed reduced reviewed

Panel49 Panel 50 Panel 51 Panel 52 Total

653 589 649 594 2,485

16

669

7

596

28

677

12

606

63 2,548

Percent reduced
2.39 1.17 4.14 1.98 2.47

10-year Comparison of Cases Reviewed

Cases Cases affirmed reduced

Percent reduced

FY 1978 FY 1979 FY 1980 FY 1981 FY 1982 FY 1983 FY 1984 FY 1985 FY 1986 FY 1987

1'123

67

5.63

1'134 101

8.18

1,228

90

6.83

1,542 145

8.60

1,846 136

6.86

2,359

88

3.60

2,335 119

4.85

2,137 100

4.47

1,769

67

3.65

2,485

63

2.47

39

Appendix I
Judicial Personnel Changes: FY 1987
Elections
Superior Courts Coweta Judicial Circuit
Allen B. Keeble for term 1/1/87 to 1/1/91. Northeastern Judicial Circuit John Girardeau for term 1/1/87 to 1/1/91.
State Courts Appling County
Bob Highsmith for term 1/1 /87 to 12/31/90. Baldwin County Robert H. Green for term 1/1 /87 to 12/31/90. Cobb County Nancy M. Campbell and Russell Carlisle (Associate Judges) for term 1/1/87 to 12/31/90. Hall County Kathlene Gosselin for term 1/1/87 to 12/31/90.

Probate Courts
Bulloch County Lee H. Deloach for term 11/26/86 to 1/1/89.
Gwinnett County Fred Meyer for term 1/1/87 to 1/1/89.
Appointments
Superior Courts
Augusta Judicial Circuit John H. Ruffin, Jr. for term 7/9/86to1/1/89.
GwinnettJudicial Circuit Bryant Huff for term 11/3/86 to 1/1/87.
Northeastern Judicial Circuit Richard W. Story for term 7/8/86 to 1/1/89.
Piedmont Judicial Circuit Penn McWhorter for term 7/8/86 to 1/1/89.
Stone Mountain Judicial Circuit Jonathan C. Peters for term 7/9/86 to 1/1/89.
State Courts
Troup County Jeannette L. Little for term 8/28/86 to 1/1/89.

Juvenile Courts
Camden County Terry K. Floyd for term 7/18/86 to 2/23/90.
Clay, Early, Randolph, and Quitman counties Ronald H. Rentz for term 8/1/86 to 7/31/90.
Hall County David A. Fox for term 7/15/86 to 12/31/90.
Troup County D. Ray McKenzie, Jr. for term 1/1/87 to 12/31/91.
Probate Courts Emanuel County
Roberta F. Cross for term 1/1 /87 to 1/1/89.

Analysis of Statewide Judicial Manpower
(July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987)

Court

!;!

.c::

b
!E

-8""''

l
~

!;; 0

"<

~
s
~

Supreme Court

7

0

0

Court of Appeals

9

0

0

Super>or Courts

1353

2

4

7

3

3

State Courts

79

3

2

6

3

4

1Full and parH1me1

Juvenile Courts

51

3

4

3

3

!Full and par1-t1me1

Probate Courts

159

2

3

2

3

1 As of June 30, 1987 2 Total number of judges leavmg the bench does not match total number of new judges 1n some 1nstances because
of new appointments or vacancies wh1ch existed at the end of the f1scal year 'Although 135 super>or court judgeshipS had been allocated by the end of the year. 131 had been filled

40