Sixteenth Annual Report on the Work of the Georgia Courts FY 1989
(July 1, 1988- June 30, 1989)
Contents
The Courts in Review: FY 1989
1
Supreme Court
7
Court of Appeals
9
Superior Courts
10
State Courts
14
Juvenile Courts
15
Probate Courts
19
Magistrate Courts
23
Other Courts
26
Judicial Agencies
27
Judicial Council of Georgia
27
Administrative Office of the Courts
28
Board of Court Reporting
31
Council of Juvenile Court Judges
32
Council of Magistrate Court Judges
33
Council of Probate Court Judges
33
Council of State Court Judges
34
Council of Superior Court Judges
34
Georgia Indigent Defense Council
34
Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council
35
Institute of Continuing Judicial Education
36
Judicial Administrative Districts
38
Judicial Nominating Commission
39
Judicial Qualifications Commission
39
Superior Courts Sentence Review Panel
41
Judicial Personnel Changes
42
April 1990
Judicial Council of Georgia Administrative Office of the Courts Suite 550 244 Washington Street, SW Atlanta, Georgia 30334
The Sixteenth 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 use of any material should be directed to: Senior Communications Officer, Administrative Office of the Courts of Georgia.
Judicial Council Chief Justice Harold G. Clarke Chairman
of Georgia
Supreme Court Atlanta
Judge Walker P. Johnson, Jr. Administrative Judge Third District Macon
Aprill990
Presiding Justice George T. Smith Vice Chairman Supreme Court Atlanta
Judge Eugene E. Lawson First Vice President Council of Probate Court Judges Jonesboro
Judge Nancy K. Aspinwall President Council of Probate Court Judges Hinesville
Judge Hugh Lawson Administrative Judge Eighth District Hawkinsville
Judge John W. Beam, Jr. President-elect Council of Juvenile Court Judges Savannah
Judge Charles B. Mikell, Jr. President Council of State Court Judges Savannah
Judge Perry Brannen, Jr. President-elect Council of Superior Court Judges Savannah
Judge Joseph B. Newton Administrative Judge First District Waycross
Chief Judge George H. Carley Court of Appeals Atlanta
Judge John W. Sognier Court of Appeals Atlanta
Judge John D. Crosby Administrative Judge Second District Tifton
Judge Robert B. Struble Administrative Judge Ninth District Toccoa
Judge Joe C. Crumbley Administrative Judge Sixth District Jonesboro
Judge Curtis V. Tillman Administrative Judge Fourth District Decatur
Judge Ogden Doremus President-elect Council of State Court Judges Metter
Judge Johnny W. Warren President Council of Magistrate Court Judges Dublin
Judge William M. Fleming, Jr. Administrative Judge Tenth District Augusta
Judge Herbert Wells President Council of Juvenile Court Judges Perry
Judge George W. Harris First Vice President Council of Magistrate Court Judges Ft. Valley
Judge Watson L. White Administrative Judge Seventh District Marietta
Judge Ralph H. Hicks Administrative Judge Fifth District Atlanta
Judge Thomas D. Wilcox, Jr. President Council of Superior Court Judges Macon
Foreword
T his Sixteenth Annual Report on the Work of the Georgia Courts, prepared by the Administrative Office of the Courts, is issued pursuant to the requirement of Ga. Laws 1973, p. 288, and by Order of the Supreme Court of Georgia dated June 12, 1978.
The constant challenge to the Georgia judiciary is to maintain an efficient, effective judicial system which dispenses equal justice while meeting the needs of a changing society. Our judges' response to this challenge has been, and continues to be, excellent.
Overall, the superior courts have increased case dispositions by 5% while experiencing a 9% rise in filings between 1987 and 1988. These courts saw a 19% jump in felony filings and were able to raise felony dispositions by 12% during the period. On an individual scale, average filings per superior court judge climbed by 150 cases as average dispositions grew by 75 cases.
The superior courts succeeded in dramatically reducing the time it takes to process cases. The average estimated time from filing to disposition was cut by almost half (49%) between 1982 and 1987. These achievements are attributed to more effective methods of case management and calendaring techniques, more productive procedures for court administration, additional judgeships, and the expanded use of computers.
By the end of the 1989 fiscal year, planned improvements were taking place. Due to the installation of personal computers in the offices of superior court clerks, each superior court clerk became part of a statewide network which grants access to the Secretary of State's business corporation records by attorneys, facilitates electronic communication among clerks, and provides word processing and spreadsheet capabilities. The Georgia Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System, appointed by former Chief Justice Marshall, formulated objectives and scheduled regional public hearings to investigate discrimination based on sex. The Georgia Indigent Defense Council prepared to operate with an initial appropriation to establish a statewide indigent defense system by assisting with the funding of local programs. The Court of Appeals' appellate settlement conference program was well under way, as was the Georgia Appellate Practice and Educational Resource Center, Inc., which assists with legal representation in appeals by indigent inmates sentenced to death.
These projects and programs are only a few of the improvements sought to administer the Georgia judicial system in such a way as to provide for the speedy and affordable resolution of disputes and prosecutions.
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 advancements in the administration of justice in Georgia.
Harold G. Clarke Chairman Judicial Council of Georgia
Filing and disposition figures included in this report cannot, and should not, be considered a complete measurement of judicial workload borne by any given judge in any given court. While more detailed case types and disposition methods may represent more accurately the amount of judicial time required of judges in processing their caseloads, statistics alone cannot describe the relative contributions by various members of the judiciary in the performance of their official duties, nor are they indicative of the effort a judge has put forth or of the hours spent in performing the duties of office.
For example, a judge might spend a week or more presiding over a felony case in which the death penalty is sought. In that same week another judge might hear dozens of uncontested divorces, traffic cases, or minor civil cases without a jury. In the first example, the judge will dispose of only one case, while the second judge disposes of dozens of cases. Both judges, however, may have expended the same amount of time and effort, and both have performed duties of the office and provided required judicial services for the citizens of Georgia. Therefore, this report should not be used to evaluate or compare judicial performance.
The Courts in Review:
FY 1989
S ignificant innovations at many levels of the state courts made FY 1989 a noteworthy year for Georgia's judges and court officials. Many activities focused on solving problems associated with reducing the processing time and managing the volume of cases within the court system. Other actions revolved around responses to administrative needs, legal requirements, and enhanced services.
In his second annual address to a joint session of the General Assembly in January 1989, Chief Justice Thomas 0. Marshall praised the efforts of the judiciary and the legislature to work together to reduce case backlog and improve court services and programs. He acknowledged the success of the judicial branch in establishing new programs and maintaining existing ones that required no increases in state financing. He also called on the legislature to meet some of the judiciary's most pressing administrative and monetary needs. The General Assembly responded positively by funding a statewide computer network, increasing compensation for judicial branch employees, creating additional superior court judgeships, and appropriating funds for new and existing programs.
The legislature approved the creation of six additional superior court judgeships that were recommended by the Judicial Council for the Atlanta, Atlantic, Chattahoochee, Cherokee, Eastern, and Southern judicial circuits. Recommendations for two additional judgeships for the Atlanta and Lookout Mountain circuits were not adopted. However, the expected addition of the new judgeships on July 1, 1989 was delayed pending the outcome of a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia in July 1988. The lawsuit challenges Georgia's "at-large" system of electing judges and seeks to enforce recent federal court rulings in other
states that expanded the 1965 Voting Rights Act to include judicial as well as legislative election practices.
Other important legislation included passage of a bill that incorporated provisions of the Federal Family Support Act of 1988, the purpose of which is to make the enforcement of child support payments more equitable and timely. Effective July 1, 1989, the new act made major changes in state law regarding child support matters that are expected to create a significant increase in the workload of superior court judges and clerks. These changes require: that the courts use the child support guidelines prescribed by OCGA 19-6-15 in all cases to determine the final amount of support; administrative reviews every 36 months of orders in which child support payments are to be made to the Office of Child Support Recovery (IV-D cases); and immediate income deductions in IV-D cases by means of continuing garnishment for support.
In other legislation effective July 1, 1989, magistrate and municipal courts were given additional authority in civil and traffic cases, respectively. Magistrate courts were granted additional civil jurisdiction to include claims valued at up to $5,000 (rather than $3,000) and to preside over the execution and acceptance of written waivers of extradition. Another bill authorized municipal courts to try misdemeanor state traffic offenses (except for violations involving homicide by vehicle) and to impose any punishment authorized under state law. This statute applies to all municipal courts regardless of whether a city, county, or state court is located in the county, if the defendant waives a jury trial.
The General Assembly passed several bills involving compensation for judges and other court officials. Effective July 1, 1989, the
1
16thAnnual Report
salaries of Supreme Court justices were increased 12.4% to $90,514, and Court of Appeals judges received a 12.5% raise to $89,931. Superior court judges received a 2.5% cost of living increase in state pay to $68,838. The legislature also increased the per diem compensation to senior superior court judges providing temporary judicial assistance from $100 to $165. In addition, a new minimum salary schedule for chief magistrates, which includes an average increase of 18%, was adopted and will take effect on January 1, 1990.
Although revenues generated by a state sales tax increase contributed to a 17.2% rise in the state budget, judicial branch appropriations were not dramatically affected. The $52.2 million appropriated by the General Assembly to the judicial branch for FY 1990
amounted to a 9.6% increase over FY 1989 allotments. The share of the judicial branch budget as a percentage of the total state budget fell from 0.74% in FY 1989 to 0.70% in FY 1990.
New judicial branch appropriations included $1 million for firsttime funding of the Georgia Indigent Defense Council. At least $950,000 of this amount will reimburse counties and circuits for expenses incurred in providing legal representation to indigent defendants.
By order of the Supreme Court dated March 15, 1989, the Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System was established to investigate the existence and scope of gender bias in the state judicial system. Under the leadership of Superior Court Judge Carol W. Hunstein, the commission began to
conduct a broad examination of the judicial system in order to prepare findings and make recommendations to the Supreme Court. Public hearings were scheduled throughout the state to gather testimony from private citizens and concerned professionals. Areas of investigation include- but are not limited to- the unequal application of procedural and substantive law, treatment of judicial employees, domestic relations, domestic violence, criminal law, child support and custody, and judicial selection. The commission is comprised of 30 members, including judges, court officials, and community and business leaders.
Applications of computer technology continued to have a positive impact on the judiciary in FY 1989. The implementation of a new superior court clerks' com-
State Appropriations for the Judicial Branch: Fiscal Years 1988, 1989, and 1990
Budget UniVAgency
FY1988 Amended Appropriation
FY1989 Amended Appropriation
Percent Change FY88-89
FY1990 General Appropriation
Percent Change FY89-90
Supreme Court
$3,654,950
$3,900,608
6.7%
$4,210,943
8.0%
Court of Appeals
4,075,070
4,504,874
10.5%
4,775.456
6.0%
Superior Courts (Total) Operations Council of Superior Court Judges Judicial Administrative Districts Prosecuting Attorneys' Council Sentence Review Panel
33,548.469 31,956,205
71,399 735,289 667,787 117.789
36.750.463 35,030,299
73.435 779.477 747,652 119,600
9.5% 9.6% 2.9% 6.0% 12.0% 1.5%
39.445,788 37,710.444
85.425 831,207 692,233 126.479
7.3% 7.7% 16.3% 6.6% -7.4% 5.8%
Juvenile Courts (Total) Operations Council of Juvenile Court Judges
289,331 0
289,331
348.408 0
348.408
20.4% 20.4%
398,760 0
398.760
14.5% 14.5%
Institute of Continuing Judicial Education (Total) Operations Magistrate Courts Training Council
467,268 376,250
91,018
550,368 425,506 124,862
17.8% 13.1% 37.2%
562,500 437,000 125,500
2.2% 2.7% 0.5%
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 Resource Center Computerized Information Network
774,675 629,565
25,110 70,500 20,000 20,000
9,500 0 0
1,509,673 665,088 28,575 71,000 26,000 20,000 10,000 150,000 539,010
94.9% 5.6%
13.8% 0.7%
30.0% 0.0% 5.3%
1.737,304 716,677 30,355 73,500 26,000 20,000 10,000 231,132 629,640
15.1% 7.8% 6.2% 3.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
54.1% 16.8%
Judicial Qualifications Commission
106,000
109,310
3.1%
112,242
2.7%
Indigent Defense Council Judicial Branch Totals
0 $42,915,763
0 $47,673,704
11.1%
1,000,000 $52,242,993
9.6%
2
FY 1989
Five-Year Comparison of Judicial Budget (1986-1990)
Fiscal Year
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
Total State Appropriation
$5,225,947,058 5,412,225,000 5,936,113,339 6,399,179,662 7,498,000,000
Increase
$861,119,383 186,277,942 523,888,339 463,066,323
1,098,820,338
Judicial Appropriation
$36,376,436 39,062,133 42,915,763 47,673,704 52,242,993
Increase
$3,334,360 2,685,697 3,853,630 4,757,941 4,569,289
Percent of State Budget
0.70% 0.72% 0.72% 0.74% 0.70%
puter information network provided electronic access to corporate records in the Secretary of State's office, and it linked clerks with each other by electronic mail through the state network.
In addition to faster and easier communication, the personal computers attached to the network gave each of Georgia's superior courts independent computing power with word-processing and spreadsheet capabilities. The General Assembly provided $539,010 in FY 1989 supplemental appropriations to purchase and install equipment for the new system. Future applications of the network may include links with other state courts and state databases or the creation of new databases to meet the needs of the judicial system.
A study released early in the year by the Administrative Office
of the Courts revealed that superior court judges have reduced the estimated average case processing time by almost 50% in the past five years. Estimated time from filing to disposition for cases filed in Georgia's superior courts averaged 10.7 months in FY 1982; by CY 1987 that estimated time had dropped to 5.4 months, a decrease of 49.4%. Several factors contributed to this decline, including the expanded use of specialized computers by the courts, more productive court administration procedures, effective methods of case management, efficient calendaring techniques, and the positive impact of 21 additional judgeships created by the General Assembly that went into effect from FY 1982 through CY 1987.
An FY 1989 study by the Administrative Office of the Courts indicated that the courts' use of
computers had increased 168% since the first poll was taken in 1984. The survey revealed that courts in 107 of Georgia's 159 counties use computers for at least some operations. Survey results also showed that courts' computer use is spread throughout the state and is less concentrated in urban areas than it was in the initial survey.
Superior courts reported the most remarkable advances in computer use with a 770% increase in the number of applications performed by their computers since 1984. The average number of applications reported by each county rose from 1.8 to 5.3 during the period. Superior court jury management and record indexing remain the most common uses, and computerized docketing has increased by 10% as a proportion of total programs.
Other positive developments in the past year included the expansion of the Georgia Law Education Diversion Program which has grown from 12 to 33 counties since 1986. The annual, ten-week program uses community volunteers and court professionals to
Judicial Branch Units: FY 1989 Funds Available and Expenditures
Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
FUNDS AVAILABLE General Appropriations Supplemental Appropriations Governor's Emergency Funds
Total State Funds Federal Funds Other Funds
$3,779,608 121,000 15,500
3,916,108 0
472,218
Total Funds Available
$4,388,326
$4,364,874 140,000 22,000
4,526,874 0
66,534
$4,593,408
EXPENDITURES Personal Services Regular Operating Expenses Travel Equipment Purchases Computer Charges Real Estate Rentals Telecommunications Per Diem, Fees & Contracts
Total Expenditures
$3,160,821 463,838 33,443 152,786 137,865 228,476 27,788 178,079
$4,383,096
$3,968,260 120,280 22,186 73,117 127,723 184,525 27,955 23,100
$4,547,146
Superior Courts
Institute of Council of Continuing Juvenile Judicial Court Judges Education
Judicial Council
Judicial Qualifications Commission Totals
$33,973,431 2,777,032 0
36,750,463 353,103 740,244
$37,843,810
$348,408 0
15,000 363,408 432,877
48,262
$844,547
$550,368 0 0
550,368 11,434 9,638
$571,440
$970,663 539,010 0
1,509,673 7,773
41,896
$1,559,342
$109,310 0 0
109,310 0 0
$109,310
$44,096,662 3,577,042 52,500
47,726,204 805,187
1,378,792
$49,91 0,183
$35,651,330 590,530 560,394 79,626 43,606 93,446 33,987 632,479
$37,685,398
$249,666 388,459 25,386 5,962 54,818 10,548 7,116 102,514
$844,469
$0 130,748
0 0 10,810 0 100 429,614
$571,272
$583,442 93,408 14,007 7,156
569,987 28,409 7,068
244,524
$1,548,001
$63,515 14,171 2,799 0 0 968 1,082 24,673
$107,208
$43,677,034 1,801,434 658,215 318,647 944,809 546,372 105,096 1,634,983
$49,686,590
3
16th Annual Report
teach juvenile offenders their rights and responsibilities under the law. It is usually combined with, or used as an alternative to, probation. The program, federally funded by a grant from the state's Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council, is designed to reduce recidivism by changing the nega-
tive attitudes youth have about the law. Plans were developed to expand the program into other counties by conducting local workshops for court staff.
Another program designed to help Georgia's children began in January, when Chief Justice Marshall swore in ten volunteers as
Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA). CASA volunteers work to promote and protect the interests of deprived and delinquent children who are victims of abuse and neglect. Plans to expand the program throughout the state depend on the ability to obtain grants and government funding.
JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF GEORGIA
GEORGIA JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
CIRCUIT BOUNDARY
I '< ~ , ' f ' 50
miles
.. '
4
FY 1989
Three years of planning culminated in the summer 1988 opening of the Georgia Appellate Practice and Educational Resource Center, Inc., a joint creation of the Georgia State University College of Law, the State Bar, the Supreme Court of Georgia, the Judicial Council, and the federal courts in Georgia. The center provides assistance with legal representation in postconviction actions for indigent, death-row inmates. In addition, it has developed continuing legal education programs for attorneys representing defendants in capital cases at both the state and federal levels. Other responsibilities of the center include monitoring all
capital punishment litigation in the state, screening and recruiting members of the private bar to handle post-conviction proceedings, and serving as expert resource counsel to assist the volunteers handling these cases. The resource center, one of the first of its kind developed in the United States, receives funds from state, federal, and private sources.
Two ongoing Georgia court programs received gold medals and $10,000 awards from the Foundation for Improvement of Justice in recognition of their work to improve the quality of the justice system. The Council of Juvenile Court Judges' Purchase of Services
Program was honored for providing funds to local courts for developing community service and restitution programs as alternatives to institutional treatment.
The Civil Arbitration Program of the Superior Court of Fulton County was also honored for its efforts to promote the speedy resolution of disputes. Begun as a test project in 1986, the program was made permanent by local rule in 1988. The rule requires parties in civil cases involving damages of $25,000 or less to undergo nonbinding arbitration before a trained three-member panel. In 1987, 86% of cases assigned to the program were resolved without a trial.
5
Georgia Court System: July 1, 1989
16th Annual Report
SUPREME COURT 7 justices 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) 137judges* Jurisdiction (general): Civil law actions, misdemeanors, and other cases. Exclusive jurisdiction over cases of divorce, title to land, equity. Exclusive felony jurisdiction. Jury trials.
STATE COURT (62 courts) 84 judges: 39 full-time, 45 part-time. Jurisdiction (limited): Civil law actions except cases within the exclusive jurisdiction of superior court. Misdemeanors, traffic, felony preliminaries. Jury trials.
I
JUVENILE COURT (159 courts; 63 county-funded) 51 judges: 12 full-time, 39 parttime (2 state court judges serve as part-time juvenile court judges). Superior court judges serve in counties without independent juvenile courts. Jurisdiction (limited): Delinquent, unruly, deprived juveniles. Juvenile traffic. No jury trials.
I I
PROBATE COURT (159 courts) 159judges Jurisdiction (limited): 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. Search warrants and arrest warrants in certain cases.
Counties with population over 100,000 where probate judge is attorney practicing at least seven years. Jury trials.
MAGISTRATE COURT (159 courts) 159 chief magistrates and 284 magistrates; 38 also serve state, juvenile, probate, civil, or municipal courts. Jurisdiction (limited): Search and arrest warrants, felony and misdemeanor preliminaries, misdemeanor bad check violations. Civil claims of $5,000 or less, dispossessories, distress warrants, county ordinances. No jury trials.
l
CIVIL COURT (2 courts) 3judges Jurisdiction (limited): 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 (limited): 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 (limited): County ordinances, criminal warrants, and preliminaries.
I
MUNICIPAL COURTS (Approximately 390 courts active) Jurisdiction (limited): Ordinance violations, traffic, criminal preliminaries. No jury trials.
*Total of 143 judgeships are authorized.
6
FY 1989
Supreme Court
T he Constitution of Georgia gives the Supreme Court exclusive appellate jurisdiction in cases involving the construction of a treaty or of the Constitution of the State of Georgia or of the United States; the constitutionality of a law, ordinance or constitutional provision; and election contests. The state constitution provides that, unless otherwise provided by law, the court shall have jurisdiction of all cases involving title to land, equity, wills, habeas corpus, extraordinary remedies (mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, etc.), divorce and alimony, and all cases in which a sentence of death was imposed or could be imposed.
The Supreme Court also is authorized to review by certiorari cases from the Court of Appeals and to answer questions of law from any state or federal appellate court.
The court has three terms of court each year, beginning in January, April, and September.
Oral arguments are heard each month, except in August and December. Cases are assigned in rotation to the justices.
The seven justices serving on the court are elected to staggered six-year terms in statewide, nonpartisan elections. A vacancy on the court is filled by gubernatorial appointment to complete the unexpired term.
The justices elect from among themselves a chief justice and a presiding justice for four-year terms, who handle administrative matters for the court. The chief justice serves as chairman and the presiding justice serves as vice chairman of the state's Judicial Council.
A court-appointed clerk, along with clerical assistants, provides 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.
Although the court nearly always hears cases in Atlanta, it occasionally schedules sessions at other locations in the state such as at law schools in order to educate students in court operations. In June of 1989, the court held a oneday session at the city hall in Savannah.
The Supreme Court has authority to promulgate orders needed to carry out its functions. By these orders 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 1987 and 1988 is shown on the next page.
7
16th Annual Report
Supreme Court Caseload: 1987 and 1988 (Docket entries)
Filed
1987
1988
Disposed
Direct appeals (Final)
538
Petitions for certiorari
540
Habeas corpus applications
203
Applications for discretionary
appeal
183
Applications for interlocutory
appeal
58
Attorney discipline
72
Original petitions/Motions
22
Cross appeals
14
Certified questions
8
Bar admissions
5
Judicial discipline
2
Other
TOTAL
1,646
562 598 171
165
32 48 32 16
3 10
0 0
1,637
By opinion Affirmed without opinion (Rule 59) Petitions for certiorari
Denied Granted Dismissed Habeas corpus applications Denied Granted Dismissed Remanded Withdrawn Dismissed without prejudice Dismissed as moot Denied without prejudice Stricken and entered on general docket Vacated and remanded Discretionary applications Denied Granted Transferred to Court of Appeals Dismissed Dismissed without prejudice Withdrawn Denied with direction Interlocutory applications Denied Granted Dismissed Transferred to Court of Appeals Original petitions/Motions Denied Granted Dismissed Dismissed without prejudice Attorney and judicial disciplinary/ Bar admissions decided by order Other Transferred to Court of Appeals by order Dismissed by order a Remanded by order Withdrawn Vacated by order Stricken from docket Certiorari granted, application granted,
notice of appeal Removal from docket to await completion
of record
1987
377 131
471 72 3
145 5 6 4 3 1 0 1 0 0
128 38 6 2 2 2
29 0 0
6 4 6 6
45
31 46
3 42 14
3
5
0
TOTALb
1,639
1988
348 121
461 74 0
138 11 2 3 1 3 2 0
128 42
4 0 0 2 0
23 15
3 0
10 4 11 4
52
44 58
8 23
7 4
6
1,615
'Includes dismissed without prejudice and dismissed as moot. bCompanion cases were counted as one case in arriving at total. 'Total includes figures from several categories not applicable to the 1988 study.
8
FY 1989
Court of Appeals
F allowing 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.
The Court of Appeals 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, child custody cases, cases involving workers' compensation, and criminal cases other than capital felonies. The court may also certify legal questions to the Supreme Court, but 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 chief judge is elected for a two-year term, usually upon the basis of seniority of tenure on the court. The chief judge is responsible for the administration of the court and together with the presiding judges forms the executive council. The chief judge appoints the three presiding judges who head each panel. All other judges rotate annually among the three panels.
Any decision rendered by a panel 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 during a judge's term, the governor appoints a successor to complete the unexpired term.
The court has three annual terms, which begin in September, January, and April, in Atlanta. The constitution provides that all cases shall be decided no later than the term following the term in which a case is docketed (the "two term" rule) or the case shall be affirmed by operation of law. In the history of the Court of Appeals, no case has been affirmed by operation of law.
Court of Appeals filings and dispositions for calendar years 1987 and 1988 are compared in the table below.
Court of Appeals Caseload: 1987 and 1988 (Docket entries)
Filed
1987
1988 Disposed
Appeals Discretionary applications Interlocutory applications
Total
2,071 342 391
2,804
2,306 356 361
3,023
By opinion By order Discretionary applications Interlocutory applications
Total
1987
1,667 294 377 324
2,662
1988
1,724 262 337 346
2,669
9
Superior Courts
16th Annual Report
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 concurrent jurisdiction over other cases with the limited jurisdiction courts located in the same county. In addition, 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 on page 4).
The number of superior court judges per circuit ranges from one judge in two circuits (Appalachian and Rockdale) to 13 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 courts are grouped into ten administrative districts with boundaries that roughly correspond to those of Georgia's U.S. congressional districts. An administrative judge, who is elected to two-year terms by the superior court judges of each district, performs executive functions 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 data and other information for management purposes and to assign superior court judges, with their approval, to serve temporarily in other counties and circuits as they are 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 from 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 continuing education requirement.
As of June 30, 1989, there were 137 judges in Georgia's 159 superior courts. Six additional judgeships, one each for the Atlanta, Atlantic, Chattahoochee, Cherokee, Eastern, and Southern judicial circuits, were created by the 1989 General Assembly.
Recent case/oad data for the superior courts is presented on page 11. The four graphs depict total, civil, criminal, and average filings and dispositions for fiscal year 1984, and for calendar years 1985-1988. CY 1988 total superior court caseload by circuit and case type is presented in the table on pages 12 and 13.
10
FY 1989
Superior Courts
FY 1984
5-year trend: total filings/ dispositions
CY 1985
t-1,
183,805
-- 240,000
---+-- ---- 210,000
I
- 180,000
5-year trend: civil filings/ dispositions
~I
156,312
- 150,000
130,195
144,081
__ ___[____ _ _ _ _ _ J
135,570
'
I t-
- - 130,000 - 110,000
5-year trend: criminal filings/ dispositions
55,224
--I:------
90,885 ------ 90,000
1
'T-6- - 70,000
---l -- 6~ ~98
i
- + - - ------t-------
-- 50,000
'
I
5-year trend: average per judge, total filings/ dispositions
1,541
1,494
FY 1984
--1_-- I
-~I
L - -1,804
1,900
- - 1 , 82
1,549
I
i ~-
1.4'87 I
CY 1985
CY 1986
I
--~.-
CY 1987
1,715
t! CY 1988
- - - 1,700 - - 1,500
Filings Dispositions
11
16thAnnualReport
CY 1988 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
South Georgia Southern Southwestern
Stone Mountain Tallapoosa Tifton
Toombs Waycross Western
TOTALS AVERAGE PER JUDGE*
Total Criminal
Filed
Disposed
3,416 3,383
935
10,141 3,095 2,677
3,185 3,158
876
10,266 3,032 1,905
931 2,040 2,546
1,917 1,847 3,852
1,884 1,114 1,976
1,208 1,634 1,048
2,634 1,445 1,962
1,836 964
2,380
2,398 1,006
844
2,326 1,200 2,999
1,008 1,125 1,052
803 1,840 2,254
1,568 1,740 4,121
1,612 897
1,974
1,059 1,361
818
2,407 1,186 1,927
1,488 826
2,501
2,404 701 703
1,969 1,061 3,008
848 1,252
891
948 517 1,996
925 550 2,034
900 1,875 1,538
5,194 1,561 1,380
1,331 1,746 1,076
90,885 663
948 1,821 1,494
4,428 1,615 1,192
1,295 1,572
971
84,486 617
Felony
Filed
Disposed
1,141 1,292
334
1,041 1,128
277
8,690 733
2,048
8,818 672
1,338
615 1,661 1,724
493 1,392 1,444
794 1,334 2,948
562 1,235 3,136
788 675 1,405
627 508 1,404
1,098 673 390
2,286 606
1,076
1,704 450 958
942 528 251
2,031 458 992
1,356 313 933
1,665 777 511
1,654 483 416
992 634 1,293
753 543 1,172
467
354
861
998
483
452
482
451
319
300
520
474
550 1,395
728
3,941 468 684
539 1,349
698
3,175 442 559
360 731 700
53,984 394
365 566 589
48,211 352
*Based on 137 superior court judges. ** Probation revocations were not included as a criminal case type prior to 1988.
Misdemeanor Filed Disposed
2,173 1,665
456
2,042 1,615
454
23 2,185
515
20 2,180
460
30
24
224
293
617
605
546
438
105
97
272
385
914
802
321
271
314
313
0
7
715
593
338
247
0
0
682
571
747
796
57 78 1,256
57 77 1,338
88
105
28
17
274
228
1,026 300
1,605
901 252 1,735
383
336
12
12
473
343
355 32
1,145
365 74
1,242
69
61
353
338
338
325
0
0
869
942
531
477
854
817
582
579
53
59
23,603 172
22,893 167
Probation Revocation **
Filed
Disposed
102
102
426
415
145
145
1,428 177 111
1,428 180 107
286
286
155
155
205
205
577
568
408
408
631
600
182
183
118
118
257
257
110
110
246
240
320
320
348
376
157
157
139
139
75
75
436
436
166
230
645
645
201
201
59
59
308
315
266
266
101
101
158
158
252
242
96
96
111
109
166
176
331
318
280
348
127
134
472
471
1,253 224 165
1,253 231 156
117
113
433
427
323
323
13,293 97
13,382 98
12
FY 1989
CY 1988 Superior Court Caseload {Docket entries)
Total Civil Filed Disposed
1,663 2,782 1,240
1,395 2,994 1,171
11,538 3,368 7,412
12,228 3,138 7,051
2,576 4,220 5,959
2,949 3,433 8,432
4,126 1,804 4,633
2,498 3,604 5,956
3,159 3,216 11,390
2,773 1,294 4,400
2,105 2,346 2,260
5,143 3,372 4,697
1,936 1,925 1,872
5,019 2,745 3,881
6,316 1,950 3,825
5,298 1,850 3,935
4,355 2,353 1,856
2,856 1,735 3,663
3,824 1,754 1,986
2,601 2,077 3,128
1,550 2,184 1,481
1,888 1,760 2,362
1,201 2,475 1,351
1,798 1,777 2,321
3,034 4,293 2,108
2,982 3,804 2,100
10,044 2,708 1,973
10,447 2,812 1,773
1,179 2,829 1,952
1,158 2,626 1,737
156,312 1,141
150,460 1,098
General Civil Filed Disposed
889 1,183
492
702 1,289
472
3,827 1,134 1,720
4,206 1,060 1,411
745 1,794 1,596
1,223 681
1,836
741 1,425 1,567
1,353 601
4,111
1,585 752
1,567
1,016 509
1,529
733 1,407
858
1,936 1,668 2,128
622 1,099
619
1,819 1,268 1,446
1,906 647 962
1,733 577 975
1,526 908 745
1,568 726
1,842
1,337 643 605
946 916 1,842
829
584
626
849
527
496
760 1,185
953
686 984 1,002
740 1,582
967
703 1,350
923
2,026 1,529
680
2,391 1,541
618
508 1,349
815
449 1,144
692
55,660 406
52,851 386
Domestic Relations
Filed
Disposed
774 1,599
748
7,711 2,234 5,692
693 1,705
699
8,022 2,078 5,640
1,831 2,426 4,363
1,726 2,752 6,596
2,541 1,052 3,066
1,757 2,179 4,389
1,806 2,615 7,279
1,757 785
2,871
1,372 939
1,402
1,314 826
1,253
3,207 1,704 2,569
3,200 1,477 2,435
4,410 1,303 2,863
3,565 1,273 2,960
2,829 1,445 1,1 11
2,487 1,111 1,381
1,288 1,009 1,821
1,655 1,161 1,286
721 1,558
954
1,128 575
1,409
617 1,626
855
1,112 793
1,319
2,294 2,711 1,141
2,279 2,454 1,177
8,018 1,179 1,293
8,056 1,271 1,155
671 1,480 1,137
709 1,482 1,045
100,652 735
97,609 712
Total Caseload
Filed
Disposed
5,079 6,165 2,175
4,580 6,152 2,047
21,679 6,463
10,089
3,507 6,260 8,505
22,494 6,170 8,956
3,301 5,444 8,210
4,866 5,280 12,284
4,727 4,956 15,511
6,010 2,918 6,609
4,385 2,191 6,374
3,313 3,980 3,308
7,777 4,817 6,659
2,995 3,286 2,690
7,426 3,931 5,808
8,152 2,914 6,205
6,786 2,676 6,436
6,753 3,359 2,700
6,228 2,455 2,689
5,182 2,935 6,662
4,570 3,138 6,136
2,558 3,309 2,533
2,049 3,727 2,242
2,836 2,277 4,358
2,723 2,327 4,355
3,934 6,168 3,646
3,930 5,625 3,594
15,238 4,269 3,353
14,875 4,427 2,965
2,510 4,575 3,028
2,453 4,198 2,708
247,197 1,804
234,946 1,715
Total Open Case load
2,349 2,682 1,399
5,681 1,255 6,247
1,795 4,639 3,210
2,508 2,536 4,747
3,319 1,309 3,093
1,963 3,503 1,100
4,168 3,761 3,550
2,600 1,272 2,769
3,032 2,234 1,194
2,914 1,537 2,552
930 391 1,351
1,454 978
2,344
1,172 2,591
953
7,290 2,677 2,315
1,206 1,909 1,713
114,192 834
13
State Courts
16th Annual Report
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 imposing a fine of up to $500 and/ or a sentence of 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 create new state courts by local act in counties where none exists. In the same manner, the legislature also establishes the number of judges to preside in state courts and whether the judges are to be full or part-time. Part-time judges are permitted to practice law, except in their own courts.
In fiscal year 1989, 62 state courts operated in 63 counties.
Georgia's only multi-county state court serves Cherokee and Forsyth counties. Of the 84 judges presiding, 39 were full-time and 45 were part-time.
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 have lived in the county for at least three years. If a vacancy occurs in a state court judgeship, the governor may fill the office by appointment.
CY 1988 filings and dispositions are listed in the table below for 24 counties that voluntarily submitted caseload data.
CV 1988 State Court Caseload a
County
Bibb Carroll Chatham Cherokee/Forsyth
Clarke b Cobb Colquitt Coweta
DeKalb Fulton Gwinnett Habersham
Houston Jackson Lowndes' Millerd
Muscogee Richmond Spalding e Sumter
Tift Treutlen Washington Worth
Misdemeanor Filed Disposed
5,509 394
2,248 3,984
2,548 5,404
869 758
5,474 429
1,841 3,757
N/A
5,041 727 961
7,175 20,557
2,601 745
5,649 15,608
1,828 684
1,554 366
2,874 54
1,449 351
2,861 54
2.390 3,583
711 1,068
1,395 1,859
553 961
1,758 123 401 298
1,510 123 383 231
Traffic Filed Disposed
2,864 5,114 2,075 9,692
6,224 61,225
1,449 3,973
2,803 3,972 1,699 8,983
N/A
59,079 1,243 3,718
7,215 9,985 1,610 1,216
8,239 6,330 1,050 1,364
10,961 4,906 8,941 404
10,754 4,861 9,165 404
2,665 5,775 2,804 1,286
1,558 3,474 2,481 1,286
7,234 4,112
741 2,594
6,332 4,112
677 2,291
Civil Filed Disposed
590 571 5,218 1,429
387 27,130
87 475
545 191 4,571 1,043
N/A
23,777 55
360
71,914 46,609
5,100 98
62,577 21,899
5,006 59
1,235
984
68
29
N/A
N/A
0
1
349
24
659
322
242
167
71
53
264
198
12
4
16
8
110
22
acriminal case loads equal the number of defendants; civil case load equals number of docket entries. b Dispositions not reported. 'Civil caseload data not submitted. dFigures for the first half of CY 1988 only. ecriminal dispositions estimated for the first half of CY 1988.
Total Caseload Filed Disposed
8,963 6,079 9,541 15,105
9,159 93,759
2,405 5,206
8,822 4,592 8,111 13,783
N/A
87,897 2,025 5,039
86,304 77,151
9,311 2,059
76,465 43,837
7,884 2,107
13,750
5,340
N/A
458
13,187
5,241
N/A
459
5,404 10,017
3,757 2,425
2,977 5,655 3,201 2,300
9,256 4,247 1,158 3,002
8,040 4,239 1,068 2,544
14
FY 1989
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. Juvenile courts have 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.
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 not yet appropriated funds to implement this act, the state's 11 full-time and 40 part-time juvenile court judges who serve in the 63 separate juvenile courts continue to be funded by the individual counties.
In counties or circuits with no separate juvenile court judge, superior court judges hear juvenile cases. Thirty referees, who must be
admitted to the state bar or have graduated from law school, serve in 34 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.
Juvenile court judges are appointed by superior court judges of the circuit for a four-year term. One exception is that the juvenile court judge of Floyd County is elected. 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.
Juvenile court caseload for CY 1988 is presented by county in the table on pages 16-18.
15
16thAnnual Report
CY 1988 Juvenile Court Caseload (Number of children)
County
Appling Atkinson Bacon Baker Baldwin
Banks Barrow Bartow Ben Hill Berrien
Bibb Bleckley Brantley Brooks Bryan
Bulloch Burke Butts Calhoun Camden
Candler Carroll Catoosa Charlton Chatham
Chattahoochee Chattooga Cherokee Clarke Clay
Clayton Clinch Cobb Coffee Colquitt
Columbia Cook Coweta Crawford Crisp
Dade Dawson Decatur DeKalb Dodge
Dooly Dougherty Douglas Early Echols
Effingham Elbert Emanuel Evans Fannin
Fayette Floyd Forsyth Franklin Fulton
Gilmer Glascock Glynn Gordon Grady
Delinquent Filed Disposed
124 11 14 1
188
11 82 281 40 71
913 10 17 70 94
96 103 75
4 187
7 316 172
18 1,095
21 53 292 516 9
980 5
1,651 96 208
226 74 211 20 73
35 21 137 3,073 56
14 908 416
50 1
98 50 41 48 20
165 379 124 46 5,428
33 1
416 188 62
98 9 6 0 185
6 69 214 8 58
745 9 9 45 66
74 96 57
3 169
5 293 165
9 738
21 48 224 505 8
634 4
1,318 84 170
209 71
210 14 61
31 14 119 1 '111 17
4 867 410
43 1
91 47 41 30 18
162 197 98 36 3,138
23 1
409 153 59
Unruly Filed Disposed
21
16
3
0
0
0
2
2
11
11
3
2
17
16
86
69
0
0
37
29
163
142
3
2
1
1
23
12
44
32
13
13
4
4
16
15
1
1
131
119
2
2
246
151
19
19
8
5
339
252
0
0
16
16
125
94
122
120
2
2
354
241
2
2
732
607
25
22
38
33
48
47
20
19
162
156
3
3
11
11
19
18
6
4
18
14
1,168
519
9
4
0
0
121
117
184
182
11
9
2
2
35
35
5
1
7
7
28
21
3
3
95
95
232
130
31
18
6
3
1,321
798
10
5
0
0
163
161
150
137
15
13
Traffic Filed Disposed
23 8 0 0 22
7 13 192
1 4
315 2 0 6 8
23 14 11 2 13
0 190 81
0 623
0 49 212 85
1
906 0
1,386 66 22
140 3
119 4 14
3 1 35 1,288 20
0 197 16
8 0
15 16 3 7 1
141 361 110
19 1,334
3 4 108 5 7
22 3 0 0 22
7 12 173
1 3
314 2 0 2 6
19 13 8 2 13
0 183 80
0 53
0 48 188 85
1
584 0
1,195 66 19
133 3
118 4 14
1 0 34 548 10
0 190 16
6 0
14 16 3 6 1
140 258 93
17 1,071
1 4 104 5 7
Deprived Filed Disposed
22
20
15
13
24
14
5
4
110
107
5
5
54
51
154
113
3
2
26
16
122
73
11
10
25
19
22
17
22
19
24
20
38
38
32
18
7
7
88
72
11
6
121
109
87
72
8
8
577
347
4
4
3
3
140
112
197
197
16
16
476
358
19
17
460
382
29
1
73
51
15
11
11
4
128
128
7
7
59
50
22
17
7
7
51
40
920
403
3
0
21
9
110
110
109
103
6
6
2
2
18
16
11
10
34
34
16
10
9
4
38
38
169
109
39
19
18
9
1,114
523
12
8
0
0
66
66
145
129
18
10
Special
Total
Proceedings
Case load
Filed Disposed Filed Disposed
2
2
192
158
0
0
37
25
0
0
38
20
1
1
9
7
5
5
336
330
0
0
26
20
21
19
187
167
130
102
843
671
1
0
45
11
3
2
141
108
403
235 1,916 1,509
3
3
29
26
8
8
51
37
4
0
125
76
6
1
174
124
4
1
160
127
11
10
170
161
7
5
141
103
6
5
20
18
65
61
484
434
1
1
21
14
6
0
879
736
1
1
360
337
1
1
35
23
67
18 2,701 1,408
2
2
27
27
3
3
124
118
55
41
824
659
16
16
936
923
3
3
31
30
150
118 2,866 1,935
3
3
29
26
217
195 4,446 3,697
4
3
220
176
1
1
342
274
27
24
456
424
2
2
110
99
15
15
635
627
2
1
36
29
14
11
171
147
2
2
81
69
7
3
42
28
5
5
246
212
257
81 6,706 2,662
2
0
90
31
3
3
38
16
75
68 1,411 1,352
74
70
799
781
2
2
77
66
2
2
7
7
10
6
176
162
2
2
84
76
0
0
85
85
3
2
102
69
0
0
33
26
24
23
463
458
37
20 1,178
714
21
15
325
243
4
2
93
67
458
223 9,655 5,753
0
0
58
37
0
0
5
5
16
16
769
756
23
23
511
447
2
2
104
91
16
FY 1989
CY 1988 Juvenile Court Caseload {Number of childrenl
County
Greene 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 Oglethorpe Paulding
Peach Pickens Pierce Pike Polk
Pulaski Putnam Quitman Rabun Randolph
Richmond Rockdale Schley Screven Seminole
Spalding Stephens Stewart Sumpter Talbot
Delinquent Filed Disposed
17 1,201
24 313
12
41 32 75 17 252
359 11 78 18 48
58 18 17 35 59
26 203 73 207
6
10 262
3 76 57
18 96 19 73 16
66 57 8 28 93
1331 229 42 10 217
83 24 25 39 99
24 9 3 34 23
1,279 208 6 23 12
373 64 18 161
7
15 1,129
15 304
3
37 20 73 15 249
256 10 62 17 45
36 5 16 34 46
20 198 70 185 10
6 227
2 73 44
14 83
7 70 14
53 57
7 19 57
1142 177 34 9 199
69 22 18 33 85
18 8 3 29 20
1,101 154
4
20 10
280 57 18 160 7
Unruly Filed Disposed
3
3
564
518
6
4
205
203
0
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
95
95
321
258
3
3
7
5
0
0
21
17
1
0
1
1
3
3
7
7
33
27
0
0
125
124
14
13
77
74
3
3
4
2
77
52
6
1
21
19
8
6
1
1
21
17
15
12
1
1
3
3
5
5
34
33
8
8
4
2
47
33
562
462
144
124
11
8
2
1
59
55
34
31
15
12
3
3
13
11
38
32
4
3
0
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
299
280
86
65
5
5
13
13
5
5
102
81
7
6
10
10
52
52
2
2
Traffic Filed Disposed
13 1,083
37 260
0
6 13 20
1 111
375 2 9 3 21
1 3 3 60 23
0 75 23 43 9
4 92
1 2 55
2 30 0 20
2
2 44
1 27 2
350 103
2 1 19
2 4 0 16 0
0 2 3 21 1
143 169
2 0 3
95 26
1 31
0
10 1,041
36 259
0
6 12 19
1 110
342 2 6 3 17
1 2 3 60 20
0 75 21 41 16
1 70 0
2 55
2 27 0 20 2
1 44
1 27 0
289 85 1 1 19
1 3 0 13 0
0 2 3 20 1
109 151
2 0 3
71 26
1 31
0
Deprived Filed Disposed
0
0
395
368
61
47
134
115
7
7
33
26
5
3
14
0
13
13
36
30
294
251
8
2
58
50
28
20
13
12
26
21
9
8
5
3
6
5
12
11
10
6
94
30
10
10
39
29
14
14
30
0
58
48
6
5
44
43
23
7
4
4
16
3
3
2
55
55
1
0
11
11
37
37
15
15
13
11
21
16
415
327
177
142
18
17
17
17
43
31
50
41
27
27
20
10
8
4
30
18
2
2
44
41
11
11
10
0
8
8
195
138
71
52
4
4
9
9
13
7
135
112
13
7
6
6
52
52
1
1
Special
Total
Proceedings
Caseload
Filed Disposed Filed Disposed
3
3
36
31
225
216 3,468 3,272
3
3
131
105
56
55
968
936
2
1
21
11
15
14
99
87
10
7
64
46
15
15
128
111
7
5
38
34
65
62
559
546
77
56 1,426 1,163
2
2
26
19
0
0
152
123
1
1
50
41
2
2
105
93
1
1
87
59
11
11
42
27
5
5
33
30
0
0
108
106
11
9
138
113
0
0
36
26
11
8
508
435
22
19
142
133
0
0
366
329
0
0
32
43
6
2
54
11
14
13
503
410
4
4
20
12
9
6
152
143
0
0
143
112
3
3
28
24
9
6
172
136
3
2
40
23
16
16
165
162
5
4
27
23
13
12
97
82
7
7
179
178
1
1
33
32
2
2
74
61
50
40
213
146
245
130 2,903 2,350
199
161
852
689
30
26
103
86
8
6
38
34
69
57
407
361
30
29
199
171
0
0
70
64
3
2
51
33
9
7
85
68
40
29
207
164
7
6
37
29
2
2
57
53
2
2
19
19
2
0
71
53
14
14
46
43
43
31 1,959 1,659
60
43
594
465
9
7
26
22
4
4
49
46
0
0
33
25
38
36
743
580
20
14
130
110
3
1
38
36
23
22
319
317
1
1
11
11
17
16th Annual Report
CY 1988 Juvenile Court Caseload (Number of children}
County
Delinquent Filed Disposed
Unruly Filed Disposed
Traffic Filed Disposed
Deprived Filed Disposed
Special
Total
Proceedings
Case load
Filed Disposed Filed Disposed
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
TOTALS
5 46 8 80 32
231 280 80
8 35
609 34 32 7 127
123 275 326
19 21
99 7 24 18 337
20 23 17 80
31,673
5 35 7 68 26
198 230 75
7 32
467 24 29
7 119
120 243 284
18 16
86 7 20 6
294
15 22 16 44
23,637
3 32 2 27 3
66 48
6 0 7
146 9 14 4 44
57 278 102
0 2
15 0 12 6 193
0 3 3 9
10,809
3 28 2 26 2
43 40 2 0
7
128 6 14 4 41
56 242 82
0 2
14 0 10 3 179
0 3 2 7
8,360
3 8 6 17 9
105 87
1 4 24
71 11 4 29 60
97 99 73 7 0
15 1 3 5
228
2 10 5 27
12,750
3 7 4 17 9
92 82
1 4 19
50 8 4 28 56
97 86 60
7 0
15 1 3 0 192
2 9 4 27
10,015
0 13 7 2 53
62 45 57
1 8
178 10 12 16 52
52 165 96
1 17
42 0 6 6
168
11 2 16 7
10,353
0 12 7 2 49
48 25 44
1 4
128 5 5 16 46
50 134 79
3 13
39 0 2 3 145
7 2 14 0
7,508
1 7 5 6 15
13 6 26 0 5
13 2 2 0 6
20 77 22
3 0
45 0 0 3
101
0 9 5 25
4,263
1 7 5 3 13
9 6 22 0 5
9 2 2 0 6
20 56 22
3 0
45 0 0 3 92
0 8 5 5
3,081
12 106 28 132 112
477 466 170
13 79
1,017 66 64 56 289
349 894 619
30 40
216 8 45 38
1,027
33 47 46 148
69,848
12 89 25 116 99
390 383 144
12 67
782 45 54 55 268
343 761 527 31 31
199 8 35 15
902
24 44 41 83
52,601
18
FY 1989
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 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. In those counties where there is no state court, 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, 1988, in counties with a population greater than 100,000 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 rna tter.
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, candidates must fulfill additional qualifications on age and the practice of law.
Newly elected or appointed judges must complete 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.
FY 1989 civil cascload data voluntarily submitted by 97 probate courts and CY 1988 criminal caseload data voluntarily submitted by 51 probate courts exercising criminal jurisdiction are presented in the tables on pages 20-22.
19
16thAnnual Report
FY 1989 Probate Court Civil Caseload (Docket entries)
County
Administration
No Administration
Necessary
Probate
Year's
Common Solemn Guardianship Support
Hospital- Habeas ization Corpus
Licenses Marriage Pistol
Total Civil
Atkinson*
3
0
1
10
6
0
7
0
36
26
89
Bacon *
2
1
1
6
1
0
8
0
23
17
59
Baker *
3
0
0
6
4
0
7
0
11
11
42
Baldwin
18
5
11
81
67
3
225
0
365
268
1,043
Banks
9
0
1
27
8
Barrow
11
1 0
0
68
42
Bartow
26
14
1
147
58
Ben Hili
16
5
5
50
a - - - - " - --- -- -~- -- -------- ----- - ------ ----------
Bibb
77
39
1
454
15 117
Bleckley
2
2
1
26
6
Brantley
1
2
0
16
7
Bryan
19
0
2
25
18
3
7
0
70
60
185
2
44
0
270
200
647
12
116
0
503
455
1,332
4
17
0
190
127
429
52
108
o
1 ,692
875
3.427
2
0
0
124
114
277
3
0
0
97
58
184
1
16
0
99
98
278
Bulloch
21
2
4
105
17
3
19
0
269
183
623
Butts
9
4
0
41
16
5
3
0
130
184
392
Candler
6
4
1
22
5
0
0
0
58
21
117
Chatham 40
15
9
124
112
27
29
554
290
1 ,201
------------------------------------------------------------------
Cherokee
28
18
9
125
32
14
41
0
540
560
1,367
Clarke
79
12
15
214
100
11
82
2
551
382
1.448
Clay*
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
8
5
18
Clayton
69
Clinch
8
29
9
256
280
45
72
0
2,275
1 ,082
4,117
--------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------
1
11
3
2
0
0
58
13
97
____ Cobb
171
52
40
Coffee
23
8
5
-~()!g~~_!!__ _ _ _~---~---------=--
717
389
78
142
0
4,68.5
2,387
63
29
5
0
0
357
198
_9_4_ _ _ _2~_____________-:__ __ --- ____2_9_ . ---~----- 372 ----- ~~
8,661 693
676
Coweta
36
14
8
143
75
i 6
67
1
564
341
1 ,265
Crawford
2
1
0
19
7
2
0
0
86
62
179
Dawson
5
4
1
32
10
3
19
0
83
97
254
Decatur
20
5
DeKaib **
51
58
0
66
27
5
26
0
246
76
471
--------------------------------------- ---
69
487
290
67
18
9
2,500
1,150
4,699
Dodge
10
9
3
44
23
4
4
1
146
79
323
Dooly *
0
0
18
3
1
4
0
21
51
99
_Qougherty_:___E_______14_______!Q ______1_20_
68
5
42
0
765
491
1,547
Douglas
22
9
Early
4
1
Effingham
15
1
Evans *
3
0
1
124
85
18
20
0
954
603
1,836
0
28
3
0
13
0
85
77
211
8
46
31
6
21
0
176
205
509
0
13
3
0
2
0
48
33
1 02
Fannin
13
4
2
28
8
Fayette
20
8
6
82
36
Fulton
427
263
221
1 ,569
1.299
-G-il-m-er-* - - - - -3- - - - - - -1 - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - -5-
3
----
Grady
13
10
3
36
10
Greene
14
1
9
23
9
Gwinnett
101
36
15
396
281
-H-al-l* - - - - -22- - - - - -7- - - - - -4- - - - -11-6- - - - 43
Haralson
39
0
0
62
15
Harris *
4
1
1
7
6
Heard'
0
0
0
7
2
Henry
19
17
11
129
75
Jasper
3
0
Jones
11
0
Laurens
32
15
Lee*
4
5
4
26
6
7
54
17
2
97
42
0
9
6
5
0
0
121
12
0
0
454
150
46
0
7,519
1
5
0
38
1
41
0
190
1
4
0
80
34
76
0
3,135
7
20
0
466
12
27
1
231
1
0
0
~
0
1
0
21
-
-
-131-
-
-
-
-
-
-263-
-
-
-
-
-00
-
-
-
-
-
452
~
4
13
0
140
7
67
0
418
3
7
0
M
151 450 5,383
28
46 92 1 .735 333
220 20 16
526
59 204 286
93
332 1 ,068 16,877
86
350 233 5,809 1,018
607 73 47
1,268
167 450 966 191
Liberty
35
1
Long*
0
0
Lowndes* 24
6
Macon*
12
2
0
61
105
9
74
0
1,300
161
1,746
0
5
1
1
4
0
16
9
36
35
16
12
22
0
441
152
709
4
54
19
0
24
0
116
99
330
McDuffie*
6
4
Miller
9
3
Mitchell
16
7
Monroe
9
5
0
27
17
4
26
0
80
123
287
1
18
1
0
0
0
~
48
122
1
50
11
2
1
0
166
97
351
5
40
8
0
3
0
128
123
321
20
FY 1989
FY 1989 Probate Court Civil Caseload (Docket entries)
County
Administration
No Administration
Necessary
Probate Common Solemn Guardianship
Year's Support
Hospitalization
Morgan*
5
1
Murray**
11
8
Muscogee 184
21
Oglethorpe
4
13
1
7
3
2
3
1
43
13
6
22
18
463
286
61
64
0
27
17
3
8
Paulding
21
8
0
99
37
7
0
Peach*
4
0
0
18
0
0
5
Pierce
6
4
10
28
6
6
20
Pike**
3
0
0
23
8
0
3
Polk
11
0
Putnam
16
6
Quitman
3
2
Randolph
9
2
4
101
17
11
71
4
26
13
5
7
1
7
1
0
2
0
31
9
0
0
Richmond 109
51
Rockdale
23
21
Seminole
13
4
Spalding
21
15
56
343
170
127
202
11
86
73
5
14
1
21
5
3
13
1
139
61
12
45
Tattnall
10
7
Taylor
8
0
Telfair
7
2
Terrell
11
1
2
143
16
3
18
6
0
26
6
1
26
13
5
18
3
62
1
16
0
5
Thomas
28
8
Tift
20
6
Towns
9
1
Troup
20
18
1
124
29
0
72
17
0
39
6
6
166
48
5
430
2
34
0
0
22
77
Turner
14
6
2
39
24
1
3
Union
16
1
5
22
21
4
0
Walker
29
25
5
141
75
14
38
Walton
35
14
5
83
38
11
52
------------------------
Ware
28
11
6
96
23
20
56
Warren*
0
1
0
5
6
0
0
Washington 14
9
9
28
6
1
13
Wheeler
0
0
2
4
6
4
4
White
12
8
Whitfield** 23
25
Wilkes*
8
0
Wilkinson
9
4
Worth
5
3
1
39
5
5
194
36
23
7
1
19
6
4
48
22
7
5
16
100
1
4
2
17
3
18
Habeas Corpus
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0
Incomplete submissions for FY 1989. ** CY 1988 data.
Licenses Marriage Pistol
Total Civil
32 215 2.133
86
591 36
140 81
447 120
19 64
1,553 642 651 583
120 51 98 87
413 394
41 486
57 111 228 301
434 7
138 36
138 422
36 73 175
27
81
127
446
786
4,016
104
262
391
1,154
29
92
64
284
84
202
314
976
133
330
15
50
64
179
1,181 422 59 417
3,792 1,297
772 1,294
119
440
48
199
105
261
102
246
164
1,202
204
749
91
187
410
1,253
70
216
170
350
194
749
-
261 ---
-
-
-
-8-00-
257
931
16
35
92
310
26
82
60
275
273
1,095
9
89
88
219
149
427
21
FY 1989 Probate Court Criminal Caseload (Docket entries)
County
Atkinson* Bacon* Baker* Banks
Barrow Bartow Ben Hill Bleckley
Brantley Butts Clay* Crawford
Dawson Dodge Dooly * Douglas
Fannin Fayette Gilmer* Greene
Haralson Harris* Heard* Henry
Jasper Laurens Lee* McDuffie*
Monroe Morgan* Murray** Oglethorpe
Paulding Peach* Pike** Polk
Quitman Randolph Seminole Taylor
Telfair Terrell Towns Turner
Union Walton Warren* Wheeler
White Wilkes* Wilkinson
Misdemeanors
Filed
Disposed
0
0
8
15
17
17
129
161
0
0
591
574
66
56
0
0
70
70
190
190
31
29
47
38
101
85
76
57
9
1
0
0
167
164
7
2
45
45
233
228
145
91
0
0
6
6
104
101
3
6
227
171
8
8
0
0
303
262
25
30
0
0
77
70
324
329
0
0
17
17
83
74
109
109
0
0
10
10
28
38
40
32
88
91
57
55
0
0
86
76
142
142
2
7
12
12
0
0
35
32
108
77
*Incomplete submissions for FY 1989. ** CY 1988 data.
Traffic Filed Disposed
556
441
117
218
346
319
712
709
1,706 5,355
789 743
1,706 4,855
670 1,300
865 1,473
144 1,167
865 1,473
122 1,152
684 943 1,819 1,989
604 612 1,574 1,446
916 1,708
213 2,339
861 1,784
213 2,259
2,105 538 82
5.233
1,383 538 86
5,086
1,010 4,464 1,067 1,347
1,010 4,261
749 1,466
10,657 1,268 2,560 879
10,126 1,418 2,560 879
1,843 96
1,070 1,613
1,809 96
1,070 1,588
280 920 1,248 802
280 922 1,148 708
1,069 1,673
191 1,511
941 1,636
186 1,393
486 2,952
214 638
407 2,952
183 635
472
336
512
628
371
294
16thAnnualReport
Total Caseload
Filed
Disposed
556
441
125
233
363
336
841
870
1,706 5,946
855 743
1,706 5,429
726 1,300
935 1,663
175 1,214
935 1,663
151 1,190
785 1,019 1,828 1,989
689 669 1,575 1,446
1,083 1,715
258 2,572
1,025 1,786
258 2,487
2,250 538 88
5.337
1,474 538 92
5,187
1,013 4,691 1,075 1,347
1,016 4,432
757 1,466
10,960 1,293 2,560 956
10,388 1,448 2,560 949
2,167 96
1,087 1,696
2,138 96
1,087 1,662
389 920 1,258 830
389 922 1,158 746
1,109 1,761
248 1,511
973 1,727
241 1,393
572 3,094
216 650
483 3,094
190 647
472
336
547
660
479
371
22
FY 1989
Magistrate Courts
A statewide 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 trials for claims of $5,000 or less; trials for county ordinance violations; trials for misdemeanor violations of bad check laws; holding preliminary hearings; and issuing summonses, arrest warrants, search warrants, distress warrants, and dispossessory writs.
Magistrates may grant bail in cases for which the setting of bail is not exclusively reserved to a judge of another court, administer oaths and issue subpoenas, as well as sentence and fine for contempt up to 10 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. These courts also hear de novo appeals from judgments of magistrate courts.
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 candidacy for magistrate office, persons 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 initial 40-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 1989,29 probate judges, three civil court judges, three juvenile court judges and referees, one state court clerk, and two municipal court judges also served as chief magistrate or magistrate.
Fiscal year 1989 magistrate court caseload is presented on pages 24-26 for 143 counties submitting data.
23
16thAnnual Report
FV 1989 Magistrate Court Caseload (Cases filed)
County
Warrants Issued
Bond and Commitment
Hearings
Criminal Cases Filed Disposed
Civil Claims Filed Disposed
Other
Total Warrants
Total
Civil Cases
and
Hearings and
Filed
Disposed Filings
Dispositions
Appling* Atkinson Bacon Baker* Baldwin
Banks Barrow Ben Hill Berrien Bibb
Bleckley Brantley Brooks Bryan* Bulloch
Burke Butts* Calhoun* Camden Candler*
Carroll Catoosa Charlton Chatham Cherokee
Clarke Clay Clayton Clinch Cobb
Coffee Colquitt Columbia Coweta Crawford
Crisp Dade Dawson Decatur DeKalb
Dodge Dooly Dougherty Douglas Early
Echols Effingham Elbert Emanuel Evans*
Fannin Fayette Floyd* Franklin Fulton
Glascock* Glynn Gordon Greene* Gwinnett
229 231 446
70 1,891
389 2,492 1,403 1,139 10,896
693 109 534 185 3,571
1,200 734 45
1,754 501
1,980 1,969
587 5,594 5,336
9,012 185
9,283 339
17,166
5,164 2,720 1.541 3,500
218
1,533 657 382
1,340 19,190
1,741 450
7,815 3,984
660
26 775 1,424 923 292
525 664 1,955 911 18,639
13 6,884 3,389
303 10,217
199 30
257 52
267
29 250 505
0 4,461
145 16
409 48
213
5 135
0 496 254
255 360 462 3,335 764
2,474 64
10,078 9
22,215
55 411 315
13 19
647 341 217 535 33,383
0 107 392 157
12
10 115 433 574
88
24 390 654 120 23,110
0 205 1,018
0 6,120
2 8 370 14 0
10 1
233 0 0
74 70 50
0 3
0 83
0 2 111
98 120
91 1.256
1
30 1
258 0
1,285
0 0 1,445 USI 28
536 0 0 0
1,184
0 0 0 386 0
0 95
0 355 329
86 698 1,392 132 21.601
0 1.032
221 0
1,077
2 8 13 14 0
10 1
414 0 0
191 41 50 0 3
0 93
0 2 0
98 170
92 1,070
1
86 0
232 0
1,271
0 0 1,011 738 24
639 0
11 0
1,084
0 0 0 399 0
0 95
0 338 18G
86 626 330 124 12,391
3 1,032
315 0
342
84 215 461
80 3,127
211 699 1,362 466 2,713
280 170 463 288 1,318
712 247
26 540 120
1,555 304 289
6,897 1,133
1,346 77
1,751 253
4,963
1,491 1,691 1,102 1,759
146
699 125 312 1,075 4,291
366 434 3,476 1,072 420
19 405 616 725 189
244 647 1,996 541 5.527
11 1,671
762 535 3,555
84 201 332
34 2,537
213 363 1,009 363 1,994
276 134 356 248 2,031
605 200
23 291 116
1,486 406 258
3,261 684
1,168 65
1,122 113
2,678
104 456 1,170 1,349 162
635 143 328
0 2,401
129 333 3,476 954 420
15 405 561 722
37
168 543 1,076 441 3,806
0 1,030
563 1,578 3,021
52 54 149 25 2,382
52 600 918 213 1,208
153 34
204 53
818
278 132
14 269
74
1,457 314 74
8,927 1,302
2,101 15
9,826 67 0
820 621 384 1,103
52
630 73 88
440 80
281 142 3,825 1,219 163
0 155 357 330 185
36 427 1,763 166 57,626
6 1,687
381 242 9,256
52 54 149 25 2,382
52 600 918 213 1,208
153 34
204 53
818
278 132
14 269
74
1,457 314 74
8,927 1,302
2,101 15
9,826 67 0
820 621 384 1,103
52
630 73 88
440 80
281 142 3,825 1,219 163
0 155 357 330 185
36 427 1,763 166 57,626
6 1,687
381 242 9,256
367 508 1,426 189 7,400
662 3,792 3,916 1,818 14,817
1,200 383
1,251 526
5,710
2,190 1,196
85 2,565
806
5,090 2,707 1,041 22,674 7,772
12,489 278
21,118 659
23,414
7,475 5,032 4,472 7,543
444
3,398 855 782
2,855 24,745
2,388 1026 15,116 6,661 1,243
45 1,430 2.397 2,333
995
891 2,436 7,106 1,750 103,393
30 11,274
4,753 1,080 24,105
337 293 751 125 5,186
304 1,214 2,846
576 7,663
765 225 1,019 349 3,065
888 560
37 1,058
444
3,296 1,250
886 16,593
2,751
5,829 144
21,258 189
26,164
979 1,488 2,880 3,203
257
2,551 557 644 975
36,948
410 582 7,693 2,729 595
25 770 1,351 1,964 496
314 1,986 3,823
851 96,933
9 3,954 2,277 1,820 18,739
24
FY 1989
FY 1989 Magistrate Court Caseload {Cases filed)
County
Hall Hancock Haralson Harris Hart
Heard* Henry Houston Irwin Jackson
Jasper Jeff Davis Jefferson* Jenkins* Johnson
Jones Lamar Lanier Lauren Lee
Liberty* Lincoln Long Lowndes Lumpkin
Macon Madison Marion McDuffie Mcintosh
Meriwether Miller Monroe Montgomery* Morgan
Murray* Muscogee Newton* Oglethorpe Paulding
Peach Pickens Pierce* Pike Pulaski
Putnam* Quitman Rabun* Randolph* Richmond
Rockdale Schley Seminole Spalding Stephens
Stewart Sumter Tattnall * Taylor* Telfair
Warrants Issued
2,641 221 932 590 668
198 1,976 7,571
368 2,072
268 1,020
187 240 424
830 487 431 2,939 634
596 169 285 6,009 637
835 843 146 1,164 459
1,237 281 816 60 570
268 0
1,234 265
1,148
1,064 882 217 382 389
427 66 464 205
15,561
2,388 170 307
3,463 1,948
281 2,441
317 75 700
Bond and Commitment
Hearings
4,572 103 74 134 199
2 3,313 2,776
0 229
129 756 64
27 19
7 32 23 2,932 111
0 49 106 1,830 366
162 364 93 221 176
51 0 97 5
271
6 0 532 19 642
729 4 42
153 120
486 28
6 20 1,911
2,167 71 72
2,083 71
44 1,231
137 7
208
Criminal
Cases
Filed
Disposed
2,225 102 123 17 43
2,225 27 77 12 76
8 597 146
0 4
0 592 48
0 39
0 0 0 1,031 87
0 2 0 823 164
138 164
0 87
2
4 0 0 0 66
15 0 690 4 82
41 29
0 10 0
8 608 77
0 3
0 592 48
0 39
0 0 0 1,033 85
0 2 0 360 45
47 141
0 87
2
4 0 0 4 17
15 0 612 0 216
59 29 0 10
0
0 0 2 0 7,852
1,622 0 15 19
474
13 0 207 0 0
0 0 2 0 7,852
1,256 0 36 22
102
14 0 104 0 0
Civil Claims Filed Disposed
1,886 918 329 389 520
1,749 838 190 315 178
140 973 1,336 400 670
172 760 179 235 222
620 416 196 1,052 420
126 1,340 1,201
400 753
173 782 179 215 121
315 383 126 1,831 382
165
294
297
212
111
104
2,102
918
346
217
519
104
447
258
121
116
699
482
270
250
827
769
319
0
715
502
43
29
452
405
144
96
1,154
469
463
432
193
184
539
645
463
266
303
244
59
67
200
69
329
226
744 43 202 79 6,433
714 131 290 1,907 516
95 1,018
319 23
377
625
44
206 89 1,649
564 75 201
1,590 268
73 991 310
24 313
Other
Total Warrants
Total
Civil Cases
and
Hearings and
Filed
Disposed Filings
Dispositions
1,809 377 128 160 248
46 686 1,435 201 381
107 299 93 149 118
182 225 59 1,042 127
165 179 19 1,860 76
352 97 59
431 65
331 43
349 8
217
22 15 286 77 277
271 82 17 71 97
243 1
53 24 5,997
1,116 60 83
2,768 191
42 751 43
5 243
1,809 377 128 160 248
46 686 1,435 201 381
107 299 93 149 118
182 225 59 1,042 127
165 179 19 1,860 76
352 97 59
431 65
331 43 349 8 217
22 15 286 77 277
271 82 17 71 97
243 1
53 24 5,997
1,116 60 83
2,768 191
42 751 43
5 243
8,561 1,618 1,512 1,156 1,479
392 4,232 10,488
969 3,127
547 2,671
507 624 803
1,632 1,128
686 6,064 1,268
926 647 415 10,794 1,223
1,844 1,551
326 2,381
796
2,399 643
1,880 111
1,305
449 1,169 2,673
539 2,046
1,839 1,296
293 663 815
1,414 110 721 308
35,843
5,840 361 695
8,157 3,129
431 4,210
886 103 1,320
10,355 1,345 469 621 701
182 5,947 5,489
601 1,366
409 2,429
384 391 297
504 640 208 6,838 705
459 442 229 4,968 704
665 860 268 1,221 493
1,155 43
948 46 910
139 484 1,862 280 1,780
1,325 359 126 303 443
1,354 73 267 133
17,409
5,103 206 392
6,463 632
173 2,973
594 36 764
25
16th Annual Report
FY 1989 Magistrate Court Caseload (Cases filed)
County
Terrell Thomas Tift Toombs Towns
Treutlen* Troup Twiggs Union Upson
Walker Walton Ware Warren Washington
Webster* Wheeler* White* Whitfield Wilcox*
Wilkes Wilkinson Worth
TOTALS
Warrants Issued
393 2,663 4,160 2,842
273
258 2,402
306 522 1,139
1,277 2,771 2,449
165 1,199
63 238 252 5,861
90
350 317 880
282,134
Bond and Commitment
Hearings
332 925 971
38 12
19 18 117
2 299
301 375 1,394
2 43
55 37 211 17 25
109 60 84
152,780
Criminal
Cases
Filed
Disposed
Civil Claims Filed Disposed
Other
Total Warrants
Total
Civil Cases
and
Hearings and
Filed
Disposed Filings
Dispositions
125
107
292
238
205
978
1,308
1,628
1,529 1,297
4
2
1,168
413
628
492
834
922
607
457
0
23
70
71
10
205 1,297
628 457
10
1,015 6,566 5,960 4,713
353
882 5,059 2,014 1,936
116
0
0
55
57
28
28
341
104
41
41
4,444
3,453 3,659
3,659 10,546
7,171
12
31
219
104
66
66
603
318
116
7
219
45
14
14
871
68
200
3
721
59
474
474
2,534
835
64 716 1,886
0 307
135 728 1,886
0 231
721 941 942 228 1,247
251 930 942 222 1,221
524 1,270
785 153 597
524 1,270
785 153 597
2,586 5,698 6,062
546 3,350
1,211 3,303 5,007
377 2,092
0
0
71
66
6
6
140
0
0
124
39
44
44
406
114
73
165
82
43
43
574
561
427
2,363
2,363 1,302
1,302 10,087
12
8
61
69
21
21
184
127 120 409 4,109 123
0
0
394
361
218
218
962
688
27
22
318
318
151
151
813
551
0
0
341
341
133
133
1,354
558
59,191
45,450 121,710
88,435 151,346
151,346 614,381
438,011
* Incomplete submissions for FY 1989.
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 include the civil courts located in
Bibb and Richmond counties and the Municipal Court of Columbus (see court organizational chart, page 6). Special courts authorized to exercise criminal jurisdiction only are the county recorder's courts of Chatham, DeKalb, and Gwinnett counties and courts of the consolidated government of Columbus-Muscogee County.
At the local level, Georgia has courts of incorporated municipalities that try municipal ordinance violations, issue criminal warrants, conduct preliminary hearings, 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.
26
FY 1989
Judicial Agencies
Judicial Council
of Georgia
Since 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 chairperson and vice chairperson, respectively. The chief judge and another member of the Court of Appeals, the presidents and presidents-elect of the superior, state, juvenile, probate, and magistrate court councils, and the ten superior court district administrative judges complete the council's membership. The full council meets at least twice each year, as it did in December 1988 and June 1989, to consider its committees' recommendations regarding specific studies and ongoing projects. The council oversees the activities of the Administrative Office of the Courts and the Board of Court Reporting (see following pages). The Judicial Council continued its contract with the ten judicial administrative districts for district personnel to conduct the 1987 calendar year casecount in the summer of 1988. Raw data obtained by the districts was ana-
lyzed by the Administrative Office of the Courts, and the results were submitted to the council for use in evaluating requests for ten additional superior court judgeships in nine judicial circuits.
In considering additional judgeships, the Judicial Council seeks a balanced and equitable distribution of superior court caseload to promote speedy and fair trials. Endorsements are based on information that clearly and convincingly depicts the necessity of additional judicial personnel. 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. In FY 1989, the council recommended to Governor Harris and the General Assembly the creation of eight new superior court judgeships in the following judicial circuits: Atlanta (thirteenth and fourteenth judgeships), Atlantic (fourth), Chattahoochee (fifth), Cherokee (third), Eastern (fifth), Lookout Mountain (fourth), and Southern (fourth). All judgeships were approved by the General Assembly except the fourteenth judgeship for the Atlanta Circuit and an additional judgeship for the Lookout Mountain Circuit.
In response to a request from a state representative, the council evaluated a proposal to split Columbia County from the threecounty Augusta Judicial Circuit. In light of its policy against creating single-county circuits, the council did not recommend dividing the Augusta Circuit.
At the end of the fiscal year, the council authorized the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) to study 1988 caseload data to determine the need for new superior court judgeships for the Atlanta,
27
16th Annual Report
Augusta, Blue Ridge, Cobb, Coweta, Flint, Gwinnett, Lookout Mountain, Macon, Middle, Ocmulgee, South Georgia, and Stone Mountain judicial circuits. The council also authorized the Administrative Office of the Courts to research a request to create a new circuit by splitting Henry County from the Flint Judicial Circuit.
During the year, the council took steps to improve casecounting and case reporting methods. The council submitted to the Uniform Rules Committees of the superior and state courts a proposal for rules requiring that each civil suit have face sheets containing case initiation and disposition information. These sheets would be filled out by attorneys to assist clerks in docketing cases.
The Electronic Data Processing Committee (EDP) is charged with making recommendations to the Judicial Council for providing uniform electronic data management systems for Georgia's courts. It is composed of judges representing each class of trial court, court clerks, and numerous staff and technical advisors from the Administrative Office of the Courts, the Department of Administrative Services, the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education, and other professional organizations and businesses.
During FY 1989, the EDP Committee coordinated the planning, funding, procurement, and installation of personal computers in the offices of all superior court clerks to link the clerks' offices with the state's mainframe computer network. The network connects clerks to the Secretary of State's automated database for inquiries regarding corporate charters and also provides access to electronic mail. At the end of FY 1989, the clerks' network was fully operational.
The council adopted the EDP committee's recommendation to discontinue the AOC's manual
case-by-case pilot project and to use the resulting funds to develop software for superior court clerks in the less populous counties. The council also approved the committee's proposal to seek funds to purchase personal computers that would connect the following persons and organizations to the statewide network: each chief judge of the 45 superior court judicial circuits; the 24 members of the Judicial Council; a designated representative of each of the five trial court judges' councils (superior, state, juvenile, probate, and magistrate courts), the ten district court administrators, the Administrative Office of the Courts, and the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education.
As charged by law, the Judicial Council took administrative action in different areas. It approved two revisions of the rules of the Board of Court Reporting, as recommended by the board. The council also voted to approve, as part of the Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council's 1989 curriculum, a three-hour domestic violence course (to be added to the initial certification course) and a three-hour course devoted to benchbook usage (to be added to every course).
A Judicial Council committee to investigate jury utilization and management standards as recommended by the American Bar Association (ABA) was appointed late in the year. The Jury Standards Committee began examining the ABA guidelines to determine whether the council should establish uniform jury standards in Georgia.
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 as liaison between national and other state judicial agencies through its administrative activities. The AOC also serves as staff to the Judicial Council, working closely with its chairperson, the chief justice of the state Supreme Court.
The AOC's administration/ operations division performs fiscal support services that involve coordinating the judicial branch appropriations request and serving as accounting officer for eight other judicial agencies. The fiscal office coordinates payroll, accounts payable, cash management, purchasing, inventory control, personnel records, and financial reporting functions for these agencies.
In FY 1989, the AOC's fiscal section managed 62 separate funding sources comprising all or part of five of the seven budget units in the judicial branch (see table, page 3). These funding sources included 26 state fund allocations, 13 federal grants, and 23 fee or other revenue accounts.
Other functions of the administration/ operations division are the promotion of communication and the exchange of information among judges, court support personnel, and public and private judicial organizations. These objectives are accomplished primarily through the production of a variety of informational publications, including the Georgia Courts Journal, a periodical that informs readers of changes in court procedure, judicial personnel
28
FY 1989
appointments and elections, recent legislation, local and national court management activities, and judicial process events.
During FY 1989, five issues of the Courts Journal 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 approximately 700 judges, county officers, and court administrative personnel.
The 1988-89 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 persons. The AOC also produced the judiciary's Fifteenth Annual Report on the Work of the Georgia Courts.
Six 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.
Eighteen press releases were also 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 appointment of new council members, and other activities. Approximately 195 printing projects were coordinated by the AOC communications staff for itself and other judicial agencies.
The AOC's research/court services division gathers statistical, financial, and other information on the judicial work of the courts so that it can identify current and future needs and 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 (see list of AOC duties on page 30).
Each year the research staff supervises the collection of caseload and other data on the trial courts' work. Through a contract with the judicial administrative districts, the AOC expended $71,000 on a manual count of calendar year 1987 cases in the superior and juvenile courts.
CY 1987 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 additional superior court judgeships in nine circuits: Atlanta, Atlantic, Chattahoochee, Cherokee, Cobb, Eastern, Gwinnett, Lookout Mountain, and Southern. The research staff also conducted a study to determine the feasibility of dividing the Augusta Judicial Circuit and the need for a full-time state court judge in Spalding County.
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. Following an analysis of the number of open cases, the AOC estimated average processing times for each judicial circuit, and the chief justice notified judges of their circuit's ranking on this measure.
According to the study, the estimated processing time for the average case in superior court decreased by 50% over five years. Some reasons given for this decrease were expanded use of computers by courts, more productive procedures for court administration, effective methods of case management, efficient calendaring techniques, and the positive benefit of the 21 additional judgeships added from FY 1982 through CY 1987.
It was found that the ten circuits in the state with the shortest overall processing times were the Atlanta, Atlantic, Conasauga, Gwinnett, Oconee, Ogeechee, Rockdale, South Georgia, Southwestern, and Waycross circuits. The Lookout Mountain Circuit demonstrated the greatest improvement in the disposition of open cases.
The AOC continued to work with the councils of state, probate, and magistrate court judges on the development of quarterly summary caseload reporting systems for each class of court. The statistical categories used to report criminal dispositions and civil filings and dispositions for the state courts were revised to provide more relevant data and simplify reporting procedures. Manuals and forms incorporating these changes were distributed to all state court clerks. New manuals were also created for the probate court summary reporting system to improve legibility, ease of use, and forms. These manuals were distributed to all probate courts.
During the year, 24 state courts, 97 probate courts, and 143 magistrate courts submitted caseload statistics.
The AOC's research staff assisted the Judicial Council's Electronic Data Processing (EDP) Committee in planning the superior court clerks' personal computer network. The immediate purpose of the network is to provide access to corporate charter information by the public and attorneys through each clerk's office. The system provides other benefits, such as electronic mail and word processing capabilities, and serves as a basis for the further automation of clerks' functions.
The AOC assisted the EDP Committee in determining budget requirements for a superior court judges' personal computer network, which would include access to legal research tools and a
29
16th Annual Report
Duties of the Administrative Office of the Courts
{OCGA 15-5-24) 1) Consult with and assist judges, administrators, clerks of court and other 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
model jury selection system. Additionally, AOC staff drafted personal computer compatibility requirements for the Judicial Council's approval.
The AOC completed its third computer survey of all trial courts to identify computer usage in the state. Survey results indicate that the courts' use of computers has increased 168% since the first poll was taken in 1984, and the number of applications computers perform in superior courts has grown 770%. As in previous years, the survey catalogs operating systems and software, types of automated court functions, and Georgia vendors. The survey was designed to update the 1986 computer survey and to furnish planning information to the EDP Committee.
Salary surveys of superior, state, juvenile, probate, and magistrate court judges and personnel were conducted to
provide court officials with information for comparison and preparation of budget and staff requests.
During FY 1989, the AOC responded to numerous state and national surveys by organizations such as the U.S. Bureau of Justice, National Center for State Courts, National Judicial College, Rural Justice Center, Georgia Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, and other states' Administrative Office of the Courts, as well as requests for information from judges, senators, representatives, and private citizens. The AOC also prepared statistics for the Bibb County courts study completed by a task force of the judicial administrative districts.
The Jury Commissioner's Handbook, which informs jury commissioners and clerks of their responsibilities and provides guidelines for preparing the jury
master list, was revised and published in a 1989 edition.
The AOC continued to provide secretariat services to six related 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 worked with the Council of Probate Court Judges, 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 updating and distributing the benchbook. The AOC provided staff assistance to the Uniform Rules Committee of the Council of Superior Court Judges in its efforts to improve the courts' procedural rules.
The AOC also provided staff, administrative, and technical support to the Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System as it began its investigation of existing and potential gender bias in the state judiciary. Areas of investigation will include the unequal application of procedural and substantive law, treatment of judicial employees, domestic relations, domestic violence, criminal law, child support and custody, and judicial selection. Testimony and information gathered from professionals and the public at regional statewide hearings will be used to prepare a report on the commission's findings and to make recommendations to the Supreme Court. The commission is composed of 30 members, including judges, court officials, and community and business leaders.
30
FY 1989
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. In order to practice, both freelance and official court reporters are required to attain certified status or to obtain a temporary permit from the board or from a judge. Board permits are issued for a single testing period and may not be renewed. Persons holding board permits may work in a freelance or official capacity until the permit expires or the reporter becomes certified. Judicial permits are issued on the signature of a judge, and these permits may be revoked by the board only with the approval of the issuing judge. Reporters on judicial permits who report more than 100 hours per year must attend the certification exams and are restricted to working in the court of the supervising judge. The exams consist of a skills test in one of three elected methods of takedown, including machine or manual shorthand or Stenomask. To become certified, reporters must pass the "B" test, which involves dictation, transcription, and a
written exam. The optional "A" test provides an opportunity for certified reporters to upgrade their professional status. Individuals who pass the initial examination submit a renewal fee by April 1 of each year to remain certified.
At the two "B" tests administered in FY 1989, 38 percent of the 298 participants passed and were certified. Four persons upgraded their certificates by qualifying for a "B" certification with no back-up.
As of June 30, 1989, there were 915 certified court reporters in the state. Fifteen reporters held temporary judicial permits, while 36 were working under temporary board permits. The board issued 88 new temporary permits during the year.
Of three formal complaints filed in FY 1989, one was issued on the board's own motion against a court reporter who had previously been convicted of a felony. Following a hearing, the reporter's license was suspended for 30 days. In the second complaint, an attorney alleged that the transcript provided by the court reporter was incorrect. The board dismissed the complaint, noting that the attorney had other remedies available to correct the transcript. The third complaint, filed against a court reporter for failure to provide a transcript of a deposition, was dismissed because the reporter's license had already been suspended for non-renewal and neither party attended the scheduled hearing date.
The Georgia Certified Court Reporter's Association (GCCRA), the profession's alliance for education and training, held two seminars during the year. The fall seminar focused on stress management and tax information. Spring seminar topics included tips on grammar, punctuation, and transcription; a demonstration of computerized, real-time reporting; and professionalism. GCCRA published a quarterly newsletter for court reporters and sponsored
legislation to provide retirement compensation to official court reporters.
The board submitted several rule changes to the Judicial Council for approval. The primary change concerned rules on eligibility for temporary permits. Sponsorship provisions were strengthened by a requirement to add the sponsor's name and certificate number to the certificate page of each transcript. Other changes included the adoption of a policy for testing disabled reporters, license revocation for persons whose licenses are suspended for more than three years, and revisions of all forms used by the board. The Judicial Council approved the requested changes at its meeting in December 1988.
The seven members of the Board of Court Reporting 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 twoyear terms of office, and the Judicial Council appoints new members to fill any vacancies. Each person is required to have accumulated at least five years of 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.
31
16th Annual Report
Council of
Juvenile Court
Judges
(Annual Report for fiscal year 1989, 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. Council membership for FY 1989 included 51 full or parttime juvenile court judges and 59 superior court judges exercising juvenile jurisdiction. Thirty juvenile court referees assist these judges in hearing cases. Staff of the council provides assistance for judges and local court staff regarding matters of court administration, court services, probation and intake standards and procedures, foster care review, uniform dockets, automation, uniform court rules, and other issues relating to the special functions of juvenile court. Judges receive yearly certification training at biannual seminars conducted in conjunction with the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education. Juvenile court judges, referees, and judges pro-tem serving more than 30 days per year are required to attend at least one of the seminars to remain certified. During the past fiscal year, 51 judges and 25 referees were certified by the council. Special projects initiated or continued by the council in FY 1989 included: 1) providing technical assistance to the Institute of Government for production of an educational video entitled "What's Going to Happen to Me?: A Look at the Juvenile Court in Georgia;"
2) formation of a joint committee with the Department of Family and Children Services
(DFCS) to plan a training conference on handling the cases of deprived or abused children for Special Assistant Attorneys General, judges, and DFCS staff;
3) placement of summer law interns with juvenile courts of Chatham and Clayton counties;
4) a joint effort with the Division of Youth Services to prepare and adopt intake and probation standards for juvenile courts;
5) planning for the July 1989 meeting of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges to be held in Atlanta; and
6) creation of a committee to establish minimum caseload standards for full-time judgeships.
The Adolescent Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) began operation in four juvenile courts in September 1988. The program provides a systematic means to identify, screen, and assess juvenile probationers who have a substance abuse problem or who are at risk for developing one.
An intervention officer and an assistant serve the juvenile courts of Cobb, Douglas, Floyd, and Gwinnett counties to conduct drug screens, make assessments, monitor cases of juveniles referred to the program, and develop links to appropriate sources of treatment in the community. A total of 392 juveniles were helped by the program during the fiscal year.
Preliminary data reveals that court involvement alone is a significant indicator of drug or alcohol problems; fifty percent of the juvenile probationers evaluated at project sites were already using illegal substances in varying degrees. Substance abuse was associated with problem behaviors, including: failing grades (15%); school discipline problems (67%); and truancy (59%). For the majority of those screened, their substance abuse problem was first identified through ASAP. In May
1989, the project received a $262,000 continuation grant from the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council.
The council's Purchase of Services for Juvenile Offenders Program was named a 1988 Achievement Award winner by the Foundation for the Improvement of Justice for its accomplishments in restitution. The program annually makes available grant funds of $250,000 to juvenile courts in 95 counties for the development of court-sponsored restitution and other community-based services. A statewide total of 2,747 children were referred for services by their judge or court worker. The average expenditure per child was $84.22. During FY 1989, a total of $231,353 was spent: 53% of total expenditures were for symbolic restitution and community service jobs; 26.9% for counseling and diagnostic testing; 18.4% for tutorial sessions; and 1.4% for temporary housing, and transportation.
The program has been instrumental in the creation of restitution and community services programs in 51 counties. Funds are also used for after-school and summer tutorial programs, counseling and diagnostic testing, temporary housing and transportation. These local efforts provide opportunities for children to make constructive changes and remain in their communities.
During fiscal year 1989, the Georgia Juvenile Justice Information System expanded from 15 to 19 counties by adding Dougherty, Gwinnett, Rockdale, and Ware counties to those already using automated docketing systems. This communication link between the council and county juvenile courts enables counties to retrieve information from the statewide database, facilitates the exchange of court records, and provides prior juvenile history information to the state's juvenile courts.
32
FY 1989
Three meetings were held during the year to provide technical support for all counties using the system. Project staff compiled an operations manual and wrote job descriptions for county positions associated with the information system.
During the year, the Permanent Homes for Children in Georgia program added seven counties, bringing the total number of participating counties to 29 and the number of volunteers who serve on foster care citizen review panels to 450. Review panels analyzed 2,215 cases and spent 9,000 hours making recommendations to juvenile court judges for the temporary placement of children in foster care.
During the 1989 legislative session, the Permanent Homes project was commended with resolutions both by the Georgia Senate and the House of Representatives. The program also was recognized by the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges as the Outstanding Volunteer Program in the Juvenile Courts of America, receiving a citation at the National Council's annual meeting in July 1989.
In October 1988, the council sponsored the Fourth Georgia Conference on Permanency Planning, "In the Best Interests of the Child." Held in Atlanta, the conference offered training in foster care review for the 260 judges, citizen volunteers, and professional caseworkers who attended. Participants attended workshops and heard lectures about the world of an abused child.
The council and the Division of Youth Services jointly administer the Georgia Juvenile Justice Personnel Development Project. The project's goals are to provide quality uniform training to community-based direct service providers and to promote better working relationships between community-based employees of independent juvenile courts and
employees of the Division of Youth Services. Each year, the project receives $45,000 in federal funds from the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council. Thirty-one workshops were held during FY'89, and topics included: time and caseload management, intake and probation standards, reality therapy, and the changing role of the American family. More than 6,544 training hours were provided for 209 employees of independent juvenile courts and for 435 employees of the Division of Youth Services.
Legislation affecting the juvenile courts that passed during the 1989 session of the General Assembly included: an act making the jailing of juvenile delinquents unlawful; guidelines governing the pretrial detention of juvenile offenders; and a provision requiring the district attorney's office to prosecute all delinquency cases upon request of the judge.
Council of
Magistrate Court
Judges
The Council of Magistrate Court Judges was statutorily created in 1988 to carry out responsibilities conferred upon it by law, to further the improvement of the magistrate courts and the administration of justice, to assist magistrates throughout the state in the execution of their duties and to promote and assist in their training. The council is composed of all chief magistrates and magistrates and is authorized to develop a constitution and by-laws. The council's executive committee, comprised of seven officers and two representatives from each of the ten judicial administrative districts, carries out the administrative duties of the council.
The council met three times in FY 1989. Each meeting consisted of a business session and a training program on a planned topic of interest. During the 1989 General Assembly, the council's legislative agenda included salary and retirement issues.
The council published the first edititon of the Georgia Magistrate Court Benchbook and supplemented it with an update late in the year. This book was distributed to each magistrate in office and to those who attended the 40-hour training course as new judges. The Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council provided three hours of instruction concerning utilization of this benchbook.
Council of
Probate Court
Judges
T he Council of Probate Court Judges was created by statute in 1988 to further the improvement of the probate courts and the administration of justice. Composed of judges and judges emeriti of the probate courts, the council has developed uniform rules, uniform forms, and a benchbook. The council met four times during FY 1989, three times with the County Officers' Association of Georgia, and once in Athens for training and the annual election of officers. During the year, the primary objective of the council was to contract with a sitting judge to produce the Handbook for Probate Judges. Due to an Attorney General's opinion on the issue, the council sought legislation to allow the contract to be executed by the council. This legislation was adopted and the contract was awarded.
33
16th Annual Report
Council of State Court Judges
0 riginally a section of the Trial Judges and Solicitors Association, the Council of State Court Judges established its separate identity in 1985. A 1988 statute officially created the council to further the improvement of the state courts, the quality and expertise of the judges, and the administration of justice. In addition to the two general meetings held during 1989, the council has an active committee system to address issues such as racial and gender bias, mandatory judicial education, uniform rules, and criminal sanctions and facilities.
Council of Superior Court
Judges
T he Council of Superior Court Judges is composed of all superior court judges (137) and senior (retired) superior court judges (44). 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. The council created two new committees during FY 1989. The Committee on Gender Bias and the Committee on Racial Bias began planning activities for upcoming years. Both made commitments to follow the precept stated by the Supreme Court's Commission on
Gender Bias in the Judicial System, operate;
that "Courts should provide due
3) to provide local programs
process and equal protection of law and attorneys who represent
to all who come before them, as
indigents with technical and
guaranteed by the federal and state research assistance, clinical and
constitutions. Equality and
training programs, and other
fairness demand equal justice."
administrative services; and
The council supported funding
4) to prepare budget reports
of the Georgia Indigent Defense
and management information
Act during debates before the
required for implementation of the
General Assembly and followed
Georgia Indigent Defense Act.
with interest the funding of new prisons and funding for altenatives to prison sentences. New child support guidelines, as approved by the legislature, were also of interest to the council.
In FY 1989, the IDC began formulating guidelines which outlined procedures for providing uniform operation of local indigent defense programs, to be submitted for subsequent approval by the
In FY 1989, the council
Georgia Supreme Court.
membership continued to actively participate in improving the administration of the courts through attendance at continuing judicial education seminars. The fall 1988 seminar was attended by 119 superior and senior superior court judges; 137 judges participated in the summer 1989 seminar.
The council received a $1 million appropriation for the 1990 fiscal year from the 1989 General Assembly. These funds were to be distributed to participating counties according to a formula that considers three equally weighted factors: county population, indigent defense caseload,
and indigent defense expenditures.
In FY 1989, the council chose a staff
Georgia Indigent director and planned for its annual program.
Defense Council The IDC works closely with county-level governing committees
on the development and operation
of local indigent defense programs.
T he Georgia Indigent
The council also consults with the
Defense Council (IDC) was State Bar of Georgia, the Council of
created by an act of the state
Superior Court Judges, the County
legislature in 1979 to provide a
Commissioners Association,
program of legal representation for district court administrators, and
indigent defendants. The council is the criminal defense bar in
composed of 13 persons appointed planning its agenda.
by the Supreme Court ... one lawyer
from each of the ten judicial
administrative districts in Georgia
and three non-lawyers from the
state at large.
The council's four statutory
purposes and duties are:
1) to administer funds provided
by the state and federal govern-
ments to support local indigent
defense programs;
2) to recommend uniform
guidelines within which local
indigent defense programs will
34
FY 1989
Georgia
Magistrate
Courts Training
Council
(Annual Report for calendar year 1989, as required by OCGA 15-10134.)
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 who are members of the State Bar of Georgia) must fulfill an annual 20-hour training requirement. In association with the council, the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education (ICJE) sponsored two 40-hour seminars and seven 20hour regional training sessions for magistrates during the 1989 calendar year (see table at right). A total of 436 magistrate court judges were certified in CY 1989. It was the first year in which all who needed certification had been able to attend training, due primarily to the availability of the second 40-hour training course in September. This was also the first year that the council did not require completion of an examina-
tion to achieve certified status. Instead, a pretest was administered to help participants identify topical areas that needed attention. It was decided that no test would be required at the CY 1990 training sessions and that the time previously devoted to testing would be made available for additional instruction. Once again, the training instructors were required to attend an intensive 20hour course designed to help them in determining their most effective methods of presentation.
Each participant was charged tuition of $125. Magistrates attending the 40-hour program took part in a variety of training modules, including instruction in legal research, reviewing the new benchbook, judicial discipline, civil claims, judicial ethics, torts and proof of damages, bookkeeping, contracts, landlord and tenant cases, garnishments and attachments, personalty actions, contempt of court, local ordinance
adjudication, criminal law, search warrants, bail, pretrial release and preliminary hearings, family violence, bad check recovery, and arrest warrants. Twenty-hour participants received instruction on judicial ethics and discipline, civil issues, evidence, criminal issues, landlord and tenant issues, and benchbook usage.
For the first time, training was provided to clerks of magistrate courts with two programs shown at various sites around the state. The first session was a live satellite transmission to 150 participants who were able to call in questions to a panel of clerks and judges. The second session, transmitted to the regional locations using a videotape of the first session, was attended by 80 persons. The council produced a notebook of handout materials and an instructional videotape, which were given to each of the 159 magistrate courts for use in training new clerks.
Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council: 1989 Seminars
Date
Location
Hours
Attendees
February 12-17
Athens
40
72
May 3-5
Tifton
20
48
May 23-25
Athens
20
61
June 6-8
Savannah
20
66
June 20-22
Forsyth
20
40
July12-17
Athens
20
34
August 2-4
Savannah
20
54
August 22-24
Dalton
20
34
September 10-15 Athens
40
27
35
16th Annual Report
Institute of
Continuing
Judicial
Education
I n fiscal year 1989, the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education (ICJE) coordinated or sponsored 34 training programs for judges, court officials, and judicial personnel. Exceeding 2,000 attendees for the second year in a row, Georgia's ICJE is one of the top state and national continuing judicial education providers in the country. The state ranked tenth in the nation among state-based continuing judicial education programs in fiscal support committed for this purpose. As an administrative arm of the Supreme Court, the Institute has retained sole responsibility for the training of all judicial personnel since 1981. The various courts and judges' councils have since adopted training standards for their members. Supreme Court justices and Court of Appeals judges must complete a minimum of 12 hours of instruction each year, with at least two hours devoted to legal or judicial ethics. Superior court judges are required to attend judicial education programs totaling at least 12 hours per year, including two hours of judicial ethics every two years. Rule 43 of the Uniform Rules for the State Courts mandates that state court judges attend continuing legal and/ or judicial education courses totaling 24 hours, two of which must be devoted to ethics studies, every two years. As prescribed by the Executive Probate Judges Council, probate court judges must complete 20 hours of initial training and 15
hours of continuing education thereafter. By law, magistrate court judges must satisfactorily fulfill an initial 40-hour training requirement (attorney magistrates are exempt) and attend an annual 20-hour recertification course. Superior court clerks are also required to complete 40 hours in basic certification and 15 hours in recertification training courses.
During FY 1989, ICJE offered its traditional calendar of annual and semiannual training events, including programs for workers' compensation judges and administrative law judges of executive branch agencies, which were first conducted in FY'88. The biannual topical specialty course was replaced with preservice orientation courses for newly elected superior, state, and probate court judges. (The table on page 37 lists the Institute's FY 1989 statebased activities, identifying the constituent group served, the course site, the date, and the number of attendees for each program.)
In March 1989, the Institute introduced continuing education to magistrate court clerks when it conducted its second intrastate satellite teleconference. Training materials and a videotape were produced and distributed to each magistrate court to be used for new clerk orientation.
ICJE also created a videotape examining judicial ethics and discipline, which featured a discussion of practices and rules among three members of the Judicial Qualifications Commission.
Other program highlights included teacher training courses for faculty who serve probate court judges, juvenile court judges, and superior court clerks. A new course, developed and tested with support from a State Justice Institute grant, focused on trial court writing. Upon completion of this project, a tested and revised
curriculum was distributed to every judicial education program in the country.
Faculty of Georgia's accredited law schools (Emory, Georgia State, Mercer, and the University of Georgia) donated valuable instruction time to ICJE programs. However, superior court judges continued to perform the bulk of instructional duties throughout the year, as they guided the instruction of mandatory evidence courses for magistrates and served as instructors for workers' compensation judges and administrative law judges.
The Institute sponsored persons attending out-of-state training programs held by nationally recognized judicial education agencies. Thirty-five of 44 applicants were granted some financial aid (usually 80% of costs) to attend nationally-based training in FY 1989. Approval was granted for training at the National Judicial College, the Institute for Court Management, the American Academy of Judicial Education, and for programs sponsored by the National Council for Family and Juvenile Court Judges. Institute funds supported the out-of-state training of fifteen superior court judges, three state court judges, four juvenile court judges and referees, three court administrative personnel, one deputy clerk, five probation personnel, and two others.
In FY 1989, the state legislature appropriated $570,368 to ICJE, a 20% increase over FY 1988 funding. The budget included these allotments: $20,000 to superior court judges for nationally-based education; $124,862 to the Magistrate Courts Training Council for administration and for training magistrate court judges and clerks; and $425,506 for administration and continuing operations of ICJE, including a new conference facilitator position. ICJE was able to reimburse mileage expenses for
36
FY 1989
about half of its program participants.
Executive Director Richard Reaves was honored for his service and leadership as president of the National Association of State Judicial Educators from 1986 to 1988.
Members of the ICJE board of trustees primarily represent client groups of state courts and judicial organizations. The board includes one Court of Appeals judge; two members of the Council of Superior Court Judges; one member from each of the councils of state, juvenile, probate, and 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 chairpersons of the Institute's board of trustees and the board of trustees of the Institute of Continuing Legal Education, and the 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.
Institute of Continuing Judicial Education FY 1989 State-based Instructional Activities
Program
Location
Date
Attendees
20-Hour Recertification Course for Magistrate Court Judges
Athens
20-Hour Recertification Course for Magistrate Court Judges
Marietta
Superior Court Judges Summer Seminar
St. Simons Island
20-Hour Recertification Course for Magistrate Court Judges
Savannah
Trial Supervision by Lawyer Magistrates
Athens
40-Hour Basic Course for Magistrate Court Judges (Civil)
Athens
Juvenile Court Judges Fall Seminar Thomasville
Fall Seminar for Administrative Law Judges
Athens
Juvenile Court Probation Officers Fall Seminar
Columbus
Faculty Development Seminar
Athens
Superior Court Judges Fall Seminar Athens
State Court Judges Fall Seminar
Pine Mountain
Superior Court Clerks Fall Seminar
Savannah
Probate Court Judges Fall Seminar Savannah
New Judges Orientation
Athens
County Officers Association Training for Probate Court Judges and Superior Court Clerks
Atlanta
40-Hour Basic Course for
Athens
Magistrate Court Judges (Criminal)
Magistrate Court Clerks Seminar (satellite teleconference)
Athens, nine additional sites
Judicial Secretaries Seminar
Savannah
Workers' Compensation Judges Spring Seminar
Athens
Faculty Development Seminar
Athens
Superior Court Clerks Spring Seminar Cordele
Probate Court Judges Spring Seminar Athens
Corrections Facilities Tour
Macon
Juvenile Court Judges Spring Seminar St. Simons
20-Hour Recertification Course
Tifton
for Magistrate Court Judges
State Court Judges Spring Seminar Juvenile Court Probation Officers
St. Simons Jekyll Island
Spring Seminar
20-Hour Recertification Course for Magistrate Court Judges
Athens
Juvenile Court Clerks Seminar
Macon
County Officers Association Training for Probate Court Judges and Superior Court Clerks
Jekyll Island
20-Hour Recertification Course for Magistrate Court Judges
Savannah
20-Hour Recertification Course for Magistrate Court Judges
Forsyth
Judicial Writing Workshops
Various sites
July 6-8, 1988
52
July 20-22, 1988
47
July 24-27, 1988
80
August 3-5, 1988
46
August 21-26, 1988 23
Sept. 7-9,1988
30
Sept. 28-30, 1988
57
October 3-5, 1988
52
October 5-7, 1988
72
October 23-25, 1988 7
October 26-28, 1988 119
Nov.30-Dec.2, 1988 55
Nov.16-18, 1988
120
Nov. 16-18, 1988
90
Dec. 7-9, 1988
45
January, 1989
72
Feb.15-17, 1989
72
March 30 & 31, 1989 228
March 8-10, 1989
117
March 20-22, 1989 24
March 20-22, 1989
18
April12-14, 1989
163
April19-21, 1989
139
April26-28, 1989
10
May 1-3, 1989
74
May 3-5, 1989
48
May8-10, 1989
61
May10-12, 1989
133
May 17-19,1989
61
May 22-23, 1989
66
June, 1989
72
June 7-9, 1989
66
June 21-23, 1989
40
Various dates
12
37
16th Annual Report
Judicial
Administrative
Districts
T he Judicial Administration Act of 1976 established ten judicial administrative districts in Georgia and created district councils, composed of all superior and senior superior court judges within the respective districts. These ten regional councils elect administrative judges who serve on the Council of Administrative Judges, which was formed to provide unified administrative rules and continuity of operation among districts. Each administrative judge selects a district court administrator to serve as staff for the judges of the district. Under the guidance of the administrative judges, the district court administrators were involved in a number of activities in fiscal year 1989. The collection and evaluation of data relevant to the operation and management of the superior courts were continued. Detailed lists of open cases were prepared for the superior court judges in each of Georgia's 159 counties. Support was provided for the administrative judges by the authorization and assignment of judges within the districts, and judges were secured from inside individual districts to serve elsewhere at the request of other administrative judges and the Governor. The district court administrators functioned as the liaison between the superior courts and local governmental officials, court personnel, various components of the criminal justice system, interested citizens, and others on the local, state, and regional level. The district administrators also assisted chief judges in the preparation, presentation, and management of local court
budgets. A number of innovative circuitwide budgets were formulated and administered by the districts during the fiscal year. Additionally, personnel policies and procedures for local court systems were developed, and the district court administrators screened and interviewed applicants for trial court administrator, law clerk, court reporter, and other court support positions.
District staff served as the local resource for information on educational programs and activities for superior court judges and other judicial support personnel. Orientation sessions for jury commissioners and seminars for courtroom bailiffs were conducted on a local basis. District court administrators provided assistance in several statewide training programs for judicial personnel.
District staff assisted chief judges and clerks in local jury management projects and coordinated jury management services provided by other court agencies and vendors. Jury selection was automated in many circuits during the last fiscal year. Technical assistance was provided for the revising of county jury boxes.
As specified by the Uniform Rules for the Superior Courts and authorized by the chief judges, district staff conferred with attorneys, media representatives, court staff, law enforcement personnel, and the general public regarding court activities. These efforts included the preparation of news releases, speeches for civic groups, and educational programs and other public relations activities deemed appropriate by the administrative judges.
The district court administrators advised local courts on records management issues, assisted in the development of records retention schedules, and coordinated records management or technical assistance
services provided to local courts by other state agencies and vendors. Major emphasis was placed on the computerization of court records in counties with sufficient resources. District personnel were involved in efforts to establish a statewide computer network for the clerks of superior court.
The administrative judges authorized assistance to individual circuits, bar associations, and governmental units in the establishment, funding, and management of local indigent defense programs. Several district court administrators served on county and circuit tripartite committees within their districts, and district personnel provided administrative support to other programs.
The district court administrators prepared grant applications, managed grant programs, and evaluated funded projects in order to provide assistance to local trial courts and assist local governments in meeting the needs of the superior courts. District staff consulted with local trial courts about space and facilities management, including their serving as liaison for architects and contractors during the construction and renovation of courthouses.
District court administrators assisted in the development of projects on arbitration, mediation, video arraignment, court delay reduction, and alternative sentencing. District court personnel aided superior court judges in dealing with local jail overcrowding problems. Studies of court systems and evaluations of court programs were conducted upon the request of local officials. Public policy concerns about using DNA "typing" in the courts were also addressed.
At the direction of the administrative judges, the district court administrators were involved in staff support of special projects and committees of the Council of
38
FY 1989
Superior Court Judges, the Judicial Council of Georgia, the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, and other court related groups. District court administrators serve on the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, the Judicial Council's Jury Standards Committee, and other local, state, and national organizations concerned with judicial administration.
Judicial
Nominating
Commission
T he Judicial Nominating Commission assists the governor in appointing 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 prerequisites vary according to the type of court, most candidates must meet a residency and age requirement. Judges of appellate 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 specific courts on pages 1-26, for more detail). The commission begins the selection process by seeking nominations from local individuals and leaders among the civic and legal communities. The commis-
sion members evaluate candidates based on a questionnaire concerning their qualifications and a legal article or brief that each candidate has written. The nominees are then investigated through interviews with attorneys familiar with them and by personally interviewing the candidates themselves.
The nominating body held five meetings in FY 1989 to consider candidates for eight judicial offices, including two new superior court judgeships, five superior court vacancies, and one state court vacancy. Since 1973, the commission has acted on a total of 175 judgeships, including:
10 Supreme Court vacancies 12 Court of Appeals vacancies 106 superior court offices 43 state court posts
2 municipal court judgeships 2 civil court vacancies. 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 are almost always initiated by a written, verified complaint, although the commission may act upon its own motion in cases where it considers such action appropriate. 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. If, following acknowledgement and review of a complaint, the commission finds that it raises questions or justifies further action, the judge is sent a copy of the complaint or a synopsis of matters to be investigated and is given reasonable opportunity to make an oral or written statement either personally or through counsel. If the judge responds satisfactorily to the complaint, it is disposed. The commission may make an initial inquiry and may authorize a preliminary investigation of the
39
16th Annual Report
Synopses of FY 1989 JQC Opinions
Opinion 124: After a judge or a candidate has made the decision to run for election or re-election he is "a candidate for election or re-election" within the meaning of subsection A(2) of Canon 7 and if he is acting on his own behalf pursuant to this purpose, he may attend a fund raising for a partisan nonjudicial candidate or an "appreciation dinner" for a friend who is retiring from the General Assembly, provided he complies with the restrictions imposed by Opinion 83.
Opinion 125: It would not be appropriate for a judge to participate in a "board of ethics" with the duty of hearing complaints of violations of an ethics code and making investigations and recommendations with respect to matters which may ultimately come before them.
Opinion 126:There is no legal or ethical problem with the appointment of an attorney who holds and retains a state bar office, such as president or secretary, to a judicial position, such as state or superior court judge.
Opinion 127: An associate magistrate is not disqualified to represent a client as his attorney because the opposite party has filed numerous civil actions in the magistrate court where the associate magistrate is a presiding judge.
Opinion 128: A judge is not automatically required to disqualify in a case because his spouse is employed as a secretary by a firm which represents one of the parties in the case but, if the circumstances are such that his impartiality "might reasonably be questioned," he should disqualify.
Opinion 129: A judge should not serve as a member of a county executive committee of the Democratic Party for the reason that as such he would be both a leader and an office holder in a political organization in violation of Canon 7A(1 ).
Opinion 130: If the terms are reasonable and fair, a newly appointed judge, who upon withdrawing from his former firm has arranged for them to pay him certain guaranteed payments plus a percentage of fees generated in certain contingent cases would not be required to disqualify but, if the judge entertains doubt as to his impartiality, or, if under the circumstances his impartiality might be reasonably questioned by others, it would be his duty to recuse himself. In any event, as long as the debt remained outstanding, the judge should make full disclosure.
Opinion 131: It is not inappropriate for candidates to state their political party affiliation and offices they have held in partisan organizations in either partisan or nonpartisan elections. The candidates may also attend partisan political functions and seek the support/endorsement of these organizations but they may not, in either partisan or nonpartisan elections, represent that they are qualified, or better qualified, because of their political party affiliations.
Opinion 132: It is not inappropriate for a convicted drunk driver to be required to meet for stated periods with a panel of victims of drunk drivers, provided such appearances are properly supervised, nor is it inappropriate for the judge to establish and administer such a panel, provided that so doing does not interfere with the proper performance of his/her judicial duties.
Opinion 133: After a judge has been listed along with other council leaders in a letter in which numerous people were invited to attend a breakfast meeting, the purpose of which was to solicit contributions to the Boy Scouts which followed closely on a request tor assistance by way of time and money in meeting a goal to raise $5 million. It was not appropriate for a judge to continue to serve as chairman of the district council.
judge's conduct or condition to determine whether formal proceedings should be instituted and a hearing held.
After a formal hearing, 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 11 regular meetings in fiscal year 1989, the commission resolved 132 complaints and requests for opinions of the 156 new matters filed and 16 pending from FY 1988. At the end of the
year, 40 issues remained pending.
One hundred seventeen complaints were disposed for the following reasons: (a) dismissed as frivolous, unfounded, unsupported, or appropriate for appeal (107); (b) judge privately reprimanded (6); (c) judge defeated after complaint filed or term expired (2); (d) judge suspended (1); (e) judge publicly reprimanded (1).
The commission held hearings on formal proceedings against three judges. One was suspended without pay for 30 days. A public reprimand, accepted by the Supreme Court, was recommended for another judge who violated the Uniform Rules for the Superior Courts and Canon 2A. The third judge filed the statutory bond required by law and the complaint was not further pursued. Six judges were privately reprimanded for violation of the canons.
The known sources of FY 1989 complaints included 105 litigants or their relations, 9 judges, 8 non-
litigants, 6 attorneys, 5 anonymous individuals, 2 public officials or officers, and 2 others.
The commission received 16 requests for advisory rulings during the year. Ten formal opinions and 2 informal opinions were rendered, while 4 applications for opinions were denied.
The seven-member commission operates under procedural rules revised as of May 1, 1985. All proceedings of the commission are confidential, with the exception of notice of a formal hearing, formal hearings, reports recommending discipline, and decisions after a hearing in which a judge was found not guilty of misconduct.
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.
40
FY 1989
Superior Courts Sentence Review Panel
Superior Courts Sentence Review Panel Caseload Summary
FY 1989 Caseload
G eorgia's Superior Courts Sentence Review Panel has operated since 1974 to review defendants' sentences to assure they are not excessive in relation to other sentences for similar crimes. 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, sentences set in misdemeanor cases, and murder cases where a life sentence has been applied. The panel retains the authority only to reduce 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
Cases
Affirmed
Panel 57 614
Panel 58 385 Panel 59 293
Panel60 597
Total
1,889
Cases Reduced
22 14 15 23
74
Cases Percent Reviewed Reduced
636
3.46%
399
3.51%
308
4.87%
620
3.71%
1,963
3.77%
10-year Comparison of Cases Reviewed
FY 1980 FY 1981 FY 1982 FY 1983 FY 1984 FY 1985 FY 1986 FY 1987 FY 1988 FY 1989
Cases Affirmed
1,228 1,542 1,846 2,359 2,335 2,137 1,769 2,485 2,273 1,889
Cases Reduced
90 145 136 88 119 100
67 63 87 74
Percent Reduced
6.83 8.60 6.86 3.60 4.85 4.47 3.65 2.47 3.69 3.77
are binding on the defendant and the superior court which imposed the sentence.
The panel affirmed 1,889 cases and reduced 74 cases in FY 1989, for a total caseload of 1,963. The reduction rate for the year was 3.77 percent.
In the last quarter of FY 1989, the cumulative reduction rate decreased further to 5.04 percent (for all 25,209 cases considered by all panels), down from 5.15 percent at the end of fiscal year 1988. Listed above is a summary of the panel's caseload for FY 1989 along with a ten-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 any member who cannot attend a meeting or who is disqualified.
An administrative board of three judges maintains continuity between 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 support staff.
41
16th Annual Report
Judicial
Personnel
Changes: FY 1989
Appointments
Superior Courts
Alcovy Judicial Circuit Marvin W. Sorrells for term 911188
to 111189. Appalachian Judicial Circuit
Elizabeth R. Glazebrook for term 711188 to 111191. Rome Judicial Circuit
Walter J. Matthews for term 8125188 to 111191. Stone Mountain Judicial Circuit
Robert P. Mallis for term 711188 to 111191. Tallapoosa Judicial Circuit
F. Marion Cummings for term 11122188 to 111191.
State Courts
Clayton County John C. Carbo, III for term 711188
to 12131190. Fulton County
Melvin K. Westmoreland for term 9120189 to 111189.
Juvenile Courts
Chattooga County Wm. Jerry Westbrook for term
1/1/89 to 111193. Colquitt County
William C. Peters for term 817188 to 816192. Dougherty County
Herbert E. Phipps for term 111189 to 12131 192. Meriwether County
David J. Turner, Jr. for term 1111188 to 10131192. Walton County
George J. Hearn, III for term 10113188 to 10113192.
Chief Magistrates
Charlton County Kile McDowell for term 911188 to
12131188. Dougherty County
T. Lee Bishop, Jr. for term 111189 to 12131 193.
Jefferson County Lanora 0. Hutchinson for term
10131188 to 12131188. Montgomery County
Johnnie C. Thigpen for term 111189 to 111193.
Elections
Superior Courts
Atlanta Judicial Circuit Leah Sears-Collins for term 1I 1I 89
to 111193. Edward H. Johnson for term
111189 to 1/1193. Chattahoochee Judicial Circuit
William J. Smith for term 1/1189 to 111193. Flint Judicial Circuit
E. Byron Smith for term 1I 1I 89 to
111/93. Rome Judicial Circuit
F. Larry Salmon for term 1I 1I 89 to 111193.
State Courts
Chattooga County Carlton H. Vines for term 111189
to 111193. Colquitt County
Frank D. Horkan for term 111189 to 1/1193. Coweta County
Guerry R. Thornton for term 111189 to 111193. Elbert County
Robert A. Johnson for term 111189 to 111193. Fulton County
Dorothy J. Vaughn for term 111189 to 111193. Jackson County
David Motes for term 111189 to 111193. Spalding County
Timothy C. Cramer for term 111189 to 111193.
Probate Court
Baker County Virginia Collins for term 111189 to
1/1193. Bartow County
Mitchell Scoggins for term 1I 1I 89 to 111193. Bibb County
William J. Self, II for term 4112189 to 1/1193.
Butts County Vicki W. Johnston for term 111189
to 111193. Carroll County
Wilma Jo Wilson for term 111189 to 111193. Dougherty County
Joe S. Champion for term 111189 to 111/93. Douglas County
James T. Baker for term 111189 to 111193. Houston County
Frances Annis for term 1I 1I 89 to 111193. Lanier County
Judy B. Mullis for term 111189 to 111193. Macon County
MackS. McCarty for term 111189 to 1/1193. McDuffie County
Albert E. Wells for term 1I 1I 89 to
111193. Oconee County *
David Anglin for term 111189 to 111193. Sumter County
Florence Heath for term 111189 to 111193. Taliaferro County*
Lois A. Richards for term 111189 to 111193. Washington County
Rachel T. Lord for term 111189 to 111193. Wheeler County *
Mackie Simpson for term 111189 to 111193. Wilcox County
Betty J. Anderson for term 111189 to 111/93. Wilkes County
Jim Burton for term 111/89 to 111193.
Chief Magistrates
Bacon County Diane Carter for term 1I 1I 89 to
111/93. Banks County
Henry D. Banks for term 111189 to 111193. Barrow County
Terri Russell for term 111189 to 111193. Bartow County
Harry F. Brown for term 111189 to 111193.
* Also serves as chief magistrate.
42
FY 1989
Catoosa County David L. Carlock for term 1/1189 to
111193. Clarke County
John M. Coleman for term 111/89 to 111193. Clay County
Judy Cooper for term 111/89 to 111193. Clinch County
Annie Ruth Steedley for term 1/1189 to 111193. Columbia County
David L Huguenin for term 111/89 to 111193. Coweta County
Francis K. Reno for term 111189 to 1/1193. Dodge County
Charles E. Nelson for term 111189 to 111/93. Fannin County
Ronald L. Newton for term 111189 to 111193. Gilmer County
Cheryl Barclay for term 1/1189 to 111193. Gordon County
Max Fuller for term 1I 1I 89 to 1/1193.
Haralson County Mark Murphy for term 111189 to
111193. Heard County
Kathy C. Knowles for term 111189 to 111193. Irwin County
Paula Daniels for term 111189 to 111193. Jefferson County
Murry Bowman for term 4i12l89 to 12131193. Lanier County
Georgia M. Williams for term 1I 1I 89 to 111193.
Liberty County
Melinda Anderson for term 1I 1I 89 to 111193.
Macon County Linda S. Rodgers for term 111189
to 1/1193. Murray County
Steve Hampton for term 111189 to 111193. Muscogee County
Haywood Turner, III for term 111189 to 111193. Stephens County
Dale Smith for term 1I 1I 89 to 111193.
Stewart County
William M. Green for term 1I 1I 89 to 111/93.
Sumter County J. W. Southwell for term 111189 to
111193. Tattnall County
Susie W. Rowland for term 1I 1I 89 to 111193.
Taylor County Ronnie A. Parker for term 111189
to 111193. Twiggs County
Richard A. Carter for term 111189 to 111/93. Webster County
Lorraine Ellington for term 1I 1I 89 to 111193.
Judicial Elections and Appointments (July 1, 1988 to June 30, 1989)
Court
Total number judgeships a
Supreme Court
7
Court of Appeals
9
Superior Courts
143 b
State Courts
84
(Full and part-time)
Juvenile Courts
51
(Full and part-time)
Probate Courts
159
Magistrate Courts
159
(Chief Magistrates)
Method of Selection
New
Elected Appointed judgeship
-
-
-
-
-
-
5
5
6c
7
2
1
Total judges beginning first terms
16 10
-
5
-
5
18
-
-
18
33
4
-
37
aAs of June 30, 1989. b Although 143 superior court judgeships had been allocated by the end of the year, only 137 had been filled. c Appointments for these new judgeships were suspended pending the outcome of a voting rights lawsuit filed in July 1989.
43