Seventeenth annual report on the work of the Georgia courts [1991]

S E V E N T E E N T H ANNUAL R E P 0 R T
ON THE WORK OF THE GEORGIA COURTS
JULY 1,1989- JUNE 3 0 , 1990
.-!
JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF GEO R GIA ADM I N I STRATIVE OFF I CE OF T H E COU RT S

SEVENTEENTH ANNUAL REPORT ON THE WORK OF THE GEORGIA COURTS
FISCAL YEAR 1990
JULY, 1989- JUNE 30, 1990

Contents

The Courts in Review

1

Supreme Court

5

Court of Appeals

7

Superior Courts

9

State Courts

13

Juvenile Courts

14

Probate Courts

18

Magistrate Courts

22

Other Courts

25

Judicial Agencies

26

Judicial Council of Georgia

26

Administrative Office of the Courts

27

Board of Court Reporting

30

Council of Juvenile Court Judges

31

Council of Magistrate Court Judges

33

Council of Probate Court Judges

34

Council of State Court Judges

34

Georgia Indigent Defense Council

34

Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council

35

Institute of Continuing Judicial Education

35

Judicial Administrative Districts

37

Judicial Nominating Commission

38

Judicial Qualifications Commission

39

Superior Courts Sentence Review Panel

41

Council of Superior Court Judges

41

Judicial Personnel Changes

42

The Seventeenth Annual Report on the Work ofthe Georgia Courts is published by the Judicial Council of Georgia and the 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 contained in this report should be directed to the
Senior Communications Officer, Administrative Office of the Courts.
Judicial Council of Georgia Administrative Office of the Courts
Suite 550 244 Washington Street, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30334

-~

~-------~~-----------------

JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF GEORGIA

JUNE 1990

Chairperson: Chief Justice Harold G. Clarke Supreme Court Atlanta
Vice Chairperson: Presiding Justice George T. Smith Supreme Court Atlanta
Judge Emmett J. Arnold, III President-elect Council of State Court Judges Jonesboro
Judge John W. Beam, Jr. President-elect Council of Juvenile Court Judges Savannah
Judge Perry Brannen, Jr. President-elect Council of Superior Court Judges Savannah
Chief Judge George H. Carley Court of Appeals Atlanta
Judge Joe C. Crumbley Superior Court Jonesboro
Judge Ogden Doremus President Council of State Court Judges Metter
Judge Frank M. Eldridge Fifth District Administrative Judge Atlanta
Judge William M. Fleming, Jr. Tenth District Administrative Judge Augusta
Judge J. Mike Greene First Vice President Council of Probate Court Judges Gray
Judge George W. Harris First Vice President Council of Magistrate Court Judges Ft Valley

Judge Walker P. Johnson, Jr. Third District Administrative Judge Macon
Judge W.D. Knight Second District Administrative Judge Nashville
Judge Eugene E. Lawson First Vice President Council of Probate Court Judges Jonesboro
Judge Hugh Lawson Eigth District Administrative Judge Hawkinsville
Judge Joseph B. Newton First District Administrative Judge Waycross
Judge John W. Sognier Court of Appeals Atlanta
Judge Robert B. Struble Ninth District Administrative Judge Toccoa
Judge Curtis V. Tillman Fourth District Administrative Judge Decatur
Judge Johnny W. Warren President Council of Magistrate Court Judges Dublin
Judge Herbert Wells President Council of Juvenile Court Judges Perry
Judge Watson L. White Seventh District Administrative Judge Marietta
Judge Thomas D. Wilcox, Jr. President Council of Superior Court Judges Macon

FOREWORD

The Seventeenth Annual Report on the Work ofthe Georgia Courts, prepared by the Administrative Office of the Courts, is issued pursuant to the requirement of Georgia Laws 1973, page 288, and by Order of the Supreme Court of Georgia dated June 12, 1978.
The current state of Georgia's judiciary is good because of the tireless work of the able and dedicated men and women of the judicial branch and because of the public respect and support for this branch. Although the courts have no capacity to control the quantity of justice sought by the people, they can and have controlled the quality.
During the year, we moved quickly toward automated jury selection, management and training. Additionally, the Judicial Council endorsed jury standards for the state patterned after the American Bar Association standards. The Georgia Courts Automation Commission published a report setting out a comprehensive plan for computerized information reporting between local courts and state agencies.
The courts adopted a variety of techniques to relieve the overburdened system such as fast-track case processing for serious felony or drug cases and the use of technology such as video arraignments and electronic monitoring in place of incarceration for pre-trial detention.
In addition, the courts began to address the issue of gender bias within the system. Much time was spent this year listening to the public and concerned professionals through public hearings. The Georgia Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System will analyze that information and present their findings.
This is just a sampling of work going on within Georgia's judiciary.
Despite an ongoing drive to implement solutions to various problems within the court system, the really

current crisis is in rising caseloads. Total filings increased 9 percent between 1988 and 1989. In just one year, the average number of case filings per superior court judge increased by 152 filings. Felony filings had the largest increase- 18.5 percent, which is likely the product of drug-related cases. Although statistics on drug cases filed in the courts are not currently kept at the state level, local studies indicate a sharp increase in those types of cases. In Chatham County Superior Court, for example, drug indictments increased 377 percent between 1986 and 1989. Drug-related cases before the Court of Appeals have also increased significantly - up 77 percent between 1986 and 1989.
With an eye on the future, Georgia's judiciary is also working to form a task force to integra(e futures planning into the routine operation of their organizations. On an individual level, almost all judges, clerks, court administrators and probation officers are participating in either mandatory or optional continuing education so they can each contribute to the progress of our court system.
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 offices are charged. Readers are invited to review the following pages and learn about the courts' ongoing advancements.

Filing and disposition figures included in this report cannot and should not be considered a complete measurement ofjudicial 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 ofjudges 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 the hours spent in performing the duties of uffice.

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 ofonly one case, while the second judge disposes of dozens of cases. Both judges, however, may have expended the same amount oftime and effort, and both have performed duties of the office and provided required judicial services for citizens ofGeorgia.
Therefore, this report should not be used to evaluate or compare judicial performance.

THE COURTS IN REVIEW: FISCAL YEAR I990

Georgia's judges and court officials focused in fiscal year 1990 on modernizing the courts to improve efficiency. Significant social issues were also at the forefront of activities including taking a look at the issue of sex discrimination in the courts and providing better legal defense services for the indigent.
A federal lawsuit challenging at-large elections of superior court judges with claims that the system diluted black voting strength remained in litigation. At stake were the election and appointments of some 47 presiding judges whose positions could have been voided. Although the issue was not resolved by the end of the fiscal year, a federal court decided in May 1990 to allow judges to continue to serve in the positions that were in question until the state exhausts its appeals. The order allowed the affected judges to serve past the expiration of their current terms if necessary.
In his first annual address to a joint session of the General Assembly in January 1990, Chief Justice Harold G. Clarke pointed to drugs as a major factor in rising caseloads in both criminal and civil courts. Despite the increasing number of cases, he noted that from 1982 to 1987 judges reduced the average estimated time from filing to disposition by 49 percent. He attributed the improvements to more effective methods of case management and calendaring techniques, more productive procedures for court administration, expanded use of computers by the courts and the benefit of 21 additional judgeships during the five-year period.
Chief Justice Clarke asked legislators to support the courts' efforts to automate the system by installing more computers. Although funds for the hardware were not approved, legislators did respond by creating the Georgia

Courts Automation Commission. The new commission was charged with studying automation of the courts and making recommendations. The 15-member group is composed of representatives from the judicial, legislative and executive branches of state government. The resolution creating the commission (HR 849) provides a two-year mandate to perform its work.
The legislature also approved the creation of five additional superior court judgeships. The measures provided for the new judges to be appointed by the governor, with terms beginning July 1, 1990 and ending Dec. 31, 1992. The new judgeships were created in Atlanta, Augusta, Coweta, Flint and Ocmulgee judicial circuits. Seven other superior court judgeships recommended by the Judicial Council, but not approved by the legislature, were for Atlanta (a total of three were initially recommended), Brunswick, Cobb, Gwinnett, Macon, South Georgia and Stone Mountain judicial circuits.
The General Assembly approved a state budget that included an 8.4 percent increase to the judicial branch for a total budget of $56.6 million for fiscal year 1991. Although most requests for improvement funds were rejected early in the session, final appropriations were sufficient to reverse the relative decline in judicial appropriations as a percent of the state total. The share of state appropriations allocated to the court'i and related agencies increased from .70 percent in fiscal year 1990 to .73 percent in fiscal year 1991.
New appropriations included $300,000 for the Council of Juvenile Court Judges to expand the Permanent Homes for Children Program. Funding was also approved to meet the increased costs to state agencies for

Five-Year Comparison of Judicial Budget (1987-1991)

FiseaJ Year
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991

Total State Appropriation
$5,412,225,000 5,936,113,339 6,399,179,662 7,498,000,000 7,785.,427,500

lnerease
$186,277,942 523,888,339 463,066,323 1,098,820,338 287;427,500

Judic:ial Appropriation
$39,062,133 42,915,763 47,673,704 52,212,242 56,613,490

Increase
$2,685,697 3,853,630 4,757,941 4,569,289 4,370,497

Percent of State Budget
$0.72% 0.72% 0.74% 0.70% 0.73%

F i s c a I Year 1 9 9 0

State Appropriations for the Judicial Branch: Fiscal Years 1989, 1990 and 1991

Budget Unit/Agency
' Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Superior Courts (Total) Operations Council of Superior Court Judges Judicial Administrative Districts Prosecuting Attorneys' Council Sentence Review Panel
. Juvenile Courts (Total) Operations Council of Juvenile Court Judges

FY 1989

FY 1990 Percent FY 1991

Percent

Amended

Amended Change General

Change

Appropriation Appropriation FY 89-90 Appropriation FY 90-91

$3,900,608 $4,370,711

12.1% $4,654,614

6.5%

4,504,874

5,189,527

15.2% 5,766,146 11.1%

36,750,463 35,030,299
73,435 779,477 747,652 119,600

38,733,929 37,030,391
84,266 812,098 682,864 124,310

5.4% 5.7% 14.7% 4.2% -8.7% 3.9%

41,812,989 39,030,342
86,772 895,564 1,649,469 150,842

7.9% 5.4% 3.0% 10.3% 141.6% 21.3%

348,408 0
348,408

396,740 0
396,740

13.9% 13.9%

787,287 0
787,287

98.4% 98.4%

"' Institute of Continuing Judicial Education (Total) Operations Magistrate Courts Training Council
' 'Judicial Council (Total) Operations Board of Court Reporting Case Counting Council of Magistrate Court Judges Council of Probate Court Judges Council of State Court Judges Appellate Resource. Center Computerized Information Networlc
...., Judicial Qualifications Commission
......
'Indigent Defense Council
'....,Judicial Branch Totals

550,368 425,506 124,862

588,136 437,000 151,136

1,509,673 665,088 28,575 71,000 26,000 20,000 10,000 150,000 539,010

1,821,781 797,015 30,144 73,500 26,000 20,000 10,000 231132 633990

109,310

111,783

0

999,635

$47,673,704 $52,212,242

6.9% 2.7% 21.0%

596,170 463,140 133,030

20.7% 19.8%
5.5%
3.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 54.1% 17.6%

1,869,692 797,973 36,0CJ7 76,500 26,000 20,000 12,000 240,000 661,122

2.3%

124,767

1,001,825

9.5% $56,613,490

1.4% 6.0% -12.0%
2.6%
0.1~.
19.7% 4.1% 0.0% 0.0%
20.0% 3.8% 4.3%
11.6%
0.2%
8.44JI>

their share of employees' health insurance costs, higher employer contributions for retirement and a 2.5 percent cost-of-living adjustment.
The Commission on Gender Bias, established by order of the Supreme Court in 1989, held a series of public hearings during the fiscal year to gather testimony from private citizens and concerned professionals. The

commission is reviewing Georgia's judicial system to determine if and where gender bias exists.lt is focusing attention on bias in the areas of domestic relations, domestic violence, criminal law, child support and custody, court employee relations and judicial selection.
A new Appellate Settlement Conference procedure took effect in October 1989. Authorized by the 1988

Seventeenth Annual Report 2

General Assembly (HB 615), it is an attempt to reduce the heavy caseload of the Court of Appeals. It gives parties to the appeal the opportunity to voluntarily settle disputes or at least to narrow or refine the issues to be considered by the court.
The Indigent Defense Council formulated guidelines for the operation of local programs funded, in part, through the council. Approved by the Supreme Court in October 1989, they cover appointment of counsel, eligibility criteria, standards of operation for local offices and programs and the hiring of contractors, attorney's fees, responsibilities of local governing committees and the mechanism for distribution of the

funds. The council later distributed $950,000 to 115 counties that had applied for funding.
In 1989 Chief Justice Thomas 0. Marshall appointed the Georgia Jury Standards Committee of the Judicial Council to determine whether the state should adopt the American Bar Association (ABA) Standards Relating to Juror Use and Management, which have been adopted by many other states and endorsed by national judicial and court administration organizations. The committee examined the ABA standards and eventually developed standards patterned after them with commentary appropriate for Geotgia's needs. The Judicial Council adopted the statewide jury standards in June 1990.

Judicial Branch Budget Units: Fiscal Year 1990 Funds Available and Expenditures

Funds Available
General . Supplemental Emergency Funds* Total State Funds Federal Fonds Other Funds
Total Funds Available

Supreme

Court

Court of Appeals

Institute of
Cound Continuing Superior of Juvenile Judieial
Conrt CourtJudges Education

Judicial Council

Judicial Qualifications CQJDmission

Indigent DefeD.se Council

Totals

$4,210,943 159,768 0
4,370,711 0
496,183

$4,775,456 414,071
0 S,189,527
0 71,952

$39,445,788 $398,760 $S62,SOO

(711,859) (2,020) 2S,636

0

0

0

38,733,929 396,740 588,136

656,928 470,312

7,189

827,482 60,123

27

$1,737,304 84,477 10,000
1,831,781 0
48,250

$112,242 (4S9)
0 111,783
0 0

$1,000,000 (36S) 0
999,635 0
50,000

$52,242,993 (30,751) 10,000
52,222,242 1,134,429 1,554,017

$4,866,894 $5,261,47!) $48,218,34& $927,175 $5!15,352 $1,880,031 $111,783 $1,049,635 $54,910,688

Expenditures

Personal Services

$3,543,240

Operating Expenses

307,048

Travel

31,926

Equipment Purchases

100,277

Computer Charges

163,019

Real Estate Rentals

293,676

Telecommunications

37,985

Per Diem, Fees & Contracts 373,717

$4,497,370 123,929 35,651 73,091 2S3,503 184,525 27;692 16,036

$37,387,190 867,854 521,943 49,546 51,627 100,365 34,940 909,282

$369,199 383,398 17,871 9,057 51,556 11,291 6,546 78,240

$0 125,491
0 1,130 19,173
0 32 448,840

$589,873 117,375 17,468 30,043 679,665 28,050 12,367 395,276

$65,139 11,048 1,271 0 0 968 869 29,466

$68,570 943,780
4,731 841 203
1,740 1,633
250

$46,520,581 2,879,924 630,859 263,985 1,218,747 620,616 122,065 2,251,108

Total Expenditures

$4,850,890 $5,211,7!)8 $3!1,922,747 $!)27,158 $594,~ $1,870,116 $108,762 $1,021,748 $54,507,885

For use at the governor's discretion

F i s c a I Year I 9 9 0 3

GEORGIA COURT SYSTEM: JUNE 30,1990

SUPREME COURT 7 justices Jurisdiction: Appellate jurisdiction over cases of constitutional issue, title to land, validity of and construction of wills, habeas corpus, e x J - - - - - - - - - - . traordinary 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 exdusive appellate jurisdiction.
SUPERIOR COURT (45 circuits) 138judges Jurisdiction (general): Civil law actions, misdemeanors, and other cases. Exclusive jurisdiction over cases of divorce, title to land, equity. Exclusive felony jurisdiction. Jury trials.

Counties with population over 100,000 where probate judge is attorney practicing at least seven years. Jury trials.

I

I I

STATE COURT (62 courts) 85 judges: 40 full-time, 45 part-time. Jurisdiction (limited): Civil law actions except cases within the exdusive jurisdiction of superior court. Misdemeanors, traffic, felony preliminaries. Jury trials.

JUVENILE COURT (159 courts; 63 county-funded) 50 judges: 15 full-time, 35 parttime (2 state court judges serve as part-time juvenile court judges). Superior court judges serve in counties without independent juvenile courts. Jurisdiction (limited): Deprived, unruly, delinquent juveniles. Juvenile traffic. No jury trials.

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.

MAGISTRATE COURT (159 courts) 159 chief magistrates and 284 magistrates; 36 also serve juvenile, probate or civil courts. Jurisdiction (limited): Search and arrest warrants, felony and misdemeanor preliminaries, misdemeanor bad check violations. Civil daims of $5,000 or less, dispossessories, distress warrants, county ordinances. No jury trials.

I
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) Sjudges 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 148 judgeships are authorized.

Seventeenth Annual Report 4

SUPREME COURT

The 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 Constitution also 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 candidate for judgeship must have been a practicing attorney for at least seven years prior to assuming office. 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 chairperson and the presiding justice serves as vice chairperson 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.
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 CounciVAdministrative Office of the Courts, the State Bar of Georgia and the Office of Bar Admissions.
The Supreme Court's caseloadfor calendar years 1988 and 1989 is shown on the next page.

Fiscal Year 1990 5

Supreme Court Caseload: 1988 and 1989
Filings
Direct appeals Petitions for certiorari Habeas corpus applications Applications for discretionary appeal Applications for interlocutory appeal Attorney disciplinaries Original petitions/motions Cross appeals Certified questions Bar admissions Judicial disciplinaries Other
Total

1988
562 598 171 165
32 48 32 16 3 10 0 0
1,637

Dispositions
By opinion Affirmed without opinion (Rule 59)
Petitions for certiorari Denied Granted Other
Habeas corpus applications Denied Granted Other
Discretionary applications Denied Granted Other
Interlocutory applications Denied Granted Other
Original petitions/motions Attorney and judicial disciplinaries/ bar admissions decided by order
Other Transferred to Court of Appeals
Dismissed Remanded Withdrawn Writs vacated Stricken from docket Certiorari granted, application granted, notice of appeal Removed from docket
Total

1988
348 121
461 74 0
138 11 13
128 42 6
23 15 3 29
52
44 58 8 23 7
4
6 1
1,615

* These caseload figures were unavailable for 1989. As a result, disposed cases were not totalled.

Seventeenth Annual Report 6

1989
574 640 157 210 64
80 40 16
2 5 3 0
1,791
1989
370 151
575 61 4
173 5 17
132 62
6
30 22
3 22
34
* * * * * *
* *


COURT OF APPEALS

Following 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 position of chief judge is filled by election 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 and holds court in Atlanta. The constitution provides that all cases shall be decided no later than the term following the term to 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 afftrmed by operation of law.
Effective Oct. 1, 1989, pursuant to an act of the General Assembly, the Court of Appeals adppted Rule 52 providing for a voluntary Settlement Conference procedure in civil cases after a notice of appeal is filed in the trial court. The procedure is intended to afford a realistic consideration of the possibility of settlement or simplification of the issues of a case prior to the docketing of the appeal in the Court of Appeals. The court has appointed a Settlement Conference chief judge and a Settlement Conference clerk in Atlanta and Settlement Conference judges throughout the state who consider those cases in which the parties have elected to proceed under Rule 52.
Court ofAppeals filings and dispositions for calendar years 1988 and 1989 are compared in the table below.

Court of Appeals Caseload: 1988 and 1989
Filed
Appeals Discretionary applications Interlocutory applications
Total
Disposed
By opinion By order Discretionary applications Interlocutory applications
Total

1988 2,306
356 361 3,023
1,724 262 337 346
2,669

F i s c a I Year 1990 7

1989 2,361
408 401 3,170
1,359 494 395 382
2,630

JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF GEORGIA
Georgia Judicial Districts Circuit Boundary_______ County Boundary - - - - - - -
50
I
miles
G orgia
Seventeenth Annual Report 8

SUPERIOR COURTS

As 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. 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 singlecounty circuits generally located in or near the several large metropolitan areas of the state.
The number of superior court judges per circuit ranges from one judge in Rockdale Circuit to 14 judges authorized 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 10 administrative districts with boundaries that roughly correspond to those of Georgia's U.S. congressional districts. An administrative judge, elected

to two-year terms by the superior court judges of each district, performs executive functions in the district and is assisted by a district court administrator who provides technical assistance for the courts. Administrative judges have statutory authority to use caseload and other information for management purposes and to assign superior court judges, with their approval, to serve temporarily in other counties and circuits as needed.
Superior court judges are elected to four-year terms in nonpartisan, circuitwide races. To qualify as a superior court judge, a candidate must be at least 30 years old, a citizen of Georgia for at least three years and have been authorized to practice law for at least seven years. Senior superior court judges, who have retired 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, 1990, there were 138 judges (143 authorized positions) in Georgia's 159 superior courts. Five additional judgeships, one each for the Atlanta, Augusta, Coweta, Flint and Ocmulgee judicial circuits, were created by the 1990 General Assembly.
Recent caseload data for the superior courts is presented on the following pages. The four graphs on page 12 depict total, civil, criminal and average filings and dispositions for calendar years 1985 through 1989. Calendar year 1989 total superior court caseload by circuit and case type is presented in the table on pages 10 and 11.

Fiscal Year 1990 9

-.---- _., .......

---~--"~-~------------------------.

Calendar Year 1989 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

3,345 3,747 1,037

3,220 3,518
948

13,033 2,852 2,306

11,425 2,781 1,933

1,173 1,924 2,778

1,004 2,237 2,658

2,550 1,323 3,775

1,894 2,042 3,891

2,384 1,493 2,226

2,108 1,480 2,383

1,408 1,801
854

1,670 1,633 1,043

3,132 1,519 1,476

3,060 1,644 1,538

2,518 1,031 2,169

2,270 1,029 2,124

3,188 1,308
944

2,970 1,343 1,030

2,638 1,500 3,667

2,190 1,415 3,478

1,266 1,025 1,064

1,290 1,143 1,035

1,217 561
2,173

1,087 524
2,100

847 2,287 2,164

1,068 2,060 2,157

6,691 1,723 1,395

6,089 1,588 1,308

1,705 1,809 1,112

1,647 1,808 1,107

102,138 740

97,969 710

Felony

Filed

Disposed

1,358 1,530
425

1,139 1,407
387

11,369 765
1,733

9,760 690
1,556

904 1,546 1,914

736 1,816 1,761

1,059 1,282 2,774

721 1,595 2,919

942 939 1,719

746 892 1,698

1,338 675 370

1,332 547 474

2,667 840 874

2,540 764 928

2,090 724
1,031

1,837 728 921

2,326 873 626

2,116 905 667

1,120 702
1,904

867 634 1,708

641

651

816

919

497

493

718

647

376

358

597

612

659 1,764
893

713 1,535
912

4,773 624 934

4,184 552 842

522

435

889

937

805

804

63,977 464

59,385 430

* Based on 138 superior court judges. **Probation revocations were not included as a criminal case type prior to 1988.

Misdemeanor Filed Disposed

1,979 1,876
467

2,050 1,772
416

18 1,903
460

19 1,908
265

20

19

203

252

647

680

902

592

3

4

213

185

915

835

314

348

415

404

I

3

704

662

203

288

0

0

647

649

518

525

23 93 1,038

28 87 1,024

70

62

9

12

218

263

1,196 486
1,489

1,001 469
1,496

473

487

0

0

485

453

349 28
1,186

293 19
1,098

106

98

255

257

685

659

21

8

841

773

217

245

1,009 719 48

1,038 665 45

23,452 170

22,456 163

Probation Revocation **

Filed

Disposed

8

31

341

339

145

145

1,646 184 112

1,646 183 112

249

249

175

169

217

217

589

581

38

443

787

787

527

527

240

240

92

280

19

335

422

424

281

281

465

520

32

231

84

85

405

405

214

214

100

179

792

792

426

426

100

100

322

322

312

312

274

274

152

152

209

224

82

89

150

147

157

147

390

390

82

257

268

268

586

586

1,897 258 244

1,897 263 221

174

174

201

206

258

258

14,706 107

16,128 117

Seventeenth Annual Report 10

Calendar Year 1989 Superior Court Caseload (Docket entries)

Total Civil Filed Disposed

1,741 3,699 1,554

1,595 3,462 1,814

12,177 3,577 6,655

12,387 3,359 7,256

2,885 4,776 4,985

2,687 4,776 5,175

3,153 3,038 8,089

2,621 2,778 9,633

4,076 2,102 4,902

3,119 1,988 4,623

3,024 2,541 2,391

2,780 2,002 2,338

7,191 3,784 5,467

6,695 3,214 4,590

6,744 1,903 4,286

7,034 1,834 4,468

4,474 2,270 1,918

4,334 1,914 1,843

3,414 2,105 4,267

3,306 1,865 4,036

1,866 2,771 1,678

1,832 2,750 1,525

1,996 1,867 2,592

1,920 1,753 2,607

2,558 5,042 2,072

2,568 4,556 2,014

10,531 2,969 2,103

10,185 2,986 1,796

1,213 3,349 1,908

1,172 3,245 1,994

167,730 1,215

162,429 1,177

General Civil Filed Disposed

783 1,448
612

676 1,228
918

4,152 1,044 1,997

4,180 935
2,335

790 1,641 1,616

707 1,653 1,651

1,338 598
1,843

1,045 682
2,252

1,281 666
1,783

815 629 1,617

785 1,592
891

597 1,148
890

2,617 1,886 1,926

2,298 1,523 1,662

2,145 623 892

2,238 652
1,013

1,716 864 695

1,675 725 686

1,179 919
2,018

1,162 742
1,981

786

808

970

945

557

489

907

854

934

888

1,017

989

979 1,772
951

9,669 1,437
954

2,016 1,479
838

2,163 1,499
645

555 1,507
884

556 1,361
911

58,492 424

55,783 404

Domestic Relations

Filed

Disposed

958 2,251
942

919 2,234
896

8,025 2,533 4,658

8,207 2,424 4,921

2,095 3,135 3,369

1,980 3,123 3,524

1,815 2,440 6,246

1,576 2,096 7,381

2,795 1,436 3,119

2,304 1,359 3,006

2,239 949
1,500

2,183 854
1,448

4,574 1,898 3,541

4,397 1,691 2,928

4,599 1,307 3,394

4,796 1,182 3,455

2,758 1,406 1,223

2,659 1,189 1,157

2,235 1,186 2,249

2,144 1,123 2,055

1,080 1,801 1,121

1,024 1,805 1,036

1,089 933
1,575

1,066 865
1,618

1,579 3,270 1,121

1,599 3,119 1,060

8,515 1,490 1,265

8,022 1,487 1,151

658 1,842 1,024

616 1,884 1,083

109,238 792

106,646 773

Total Caseload

Filed

Disposed

5,086 7,446 2,591

4,815 6,890 2,762

25,210 6,429 8,961

23,812 6,140 9,189

4,058 6,700 7,763

3,691 7,013 7,833

5,703 4,361 11,864

4,515 4,820 13,524

6,460 3,595 7,128

5,227 3,468 7,005

4,432 4,342 3,245

4,450 3,635 3,381

10,323 5,303 6,943

9,755 4,858 6,128

9,262 2,961 6,455

9,304 2,863 6,592

7,662 3,578 2,862

7,304 3,257 2,873

6,052 3,605 7,934

5,496 3,280 7,514

3,312 3,796 2,742

3,122 3,893 2,560

3,213 2,428 4,765

3,007 2,277 4,707

3,405 7,329 4,236

3,636 6,616 4,171

17,222 4,692 3,498

16,274 4,574 3,104

2,918 5,158 3,020

2,819 5,053 3,101

269,868 1,956

260,398 1,887

Total Open Caseload
1,913 3,231 1,474
8,778 1,395 5,999
2,050 3,757 3,092
3,533 1,654 4,666
3,508 1,354 3,246
2,220 3,766
942
4,539 4,183 4,158
2,553 1,318 2,615
3,223 2,474 1,043
2,998 1,816 2,655
850 633 1,163
1,589 1,152 2,379
775 3,141
963
9,377 2,752 2,592
1,281 1,874 1,598
122,272 886

Fiscal Year 1990 11

Superior Courts
CY 1985
5-year trend: total filings/ dispositions
202,901
194~6.........

CY 1986

CY 1987

CY 1988

CY 1989

26)868

I
226,610

2~: / 260,398

2.1.J3- ,52124,~621~2~9~

207:011

270,000 240,000 210,000 180,000

5-year trend: civil filings/ dispositions

167!730

145,079

~' 144,333

429

~~I 140,, 803 ~/

150,460

130,195

135,570

170,000 150,000 130,000 110,000

5-year trend: criminal filings/ dispositions

i
102,138

62,0r-9_8_ _ _+ - - - - - + - - - - f - - - - - - - + - - - - - 50,000

5-year trend: average per judge, total filings/ dispositions

1,956

Filings Dispositions

1,487
CY 1985

CY 1986

CY 1987

CY 1988

CY 1989

1,500

Seventeenth Annual Report 12

STATE COURTS

A 1970 legislative act established Georgia's state court system by designating as such certain existing countywide courts of limited jurisdiction. In counties where they are located, these courts may exercise jurisdiction over all misdemeanor violations, including traffic cases, and all civil actions, regardless of the amount claimed, unless the superior court has exclusive jurisdiction.
State courts are authorized by statute to hold hearings regarding applications for and issuance of search and arrest warrants and to hold preliminary hearings. These courts may also punish contempt by 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 1990, 62 state courts operated in 63 counties. Georgia's only multi-county state court serves Cherokee and Forsyth Counties. Of the 85 judges presiding, 40 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.
Calendar year 1989 filings and dispositions are listed in the table below for 22 courts that voluntarily submitted caseload data.

State Court Caseload for Calendar Year 1989

County
Bibb Carroll Chatham Cherokee I Forsyth Cobb Colquin DeKalb Fulton Gwinnett Habersham Hall Houston Jackson Lowndes' Musco gee Richmond Spalding Sumter Tift Treutlen' Washington Worth

Misdemeanor

Filed

Disposed

5,486 431
2,712 5,327 6,031 1,343 6,029 17,484 5,390
654 2,910 1,790
558 2,180 2,765 3,712
706 1,114 1,780
0 385 416

3,987 485
3,155 4,911 6,975 1,264 6,464 18,633 4,187
716 2,991 1,798
296 2,180 2,479 2,768
729 1,190 1,587
0 395 321

Traffic

Filed

Disposed

1,412 4,454 2,622 12,905 54,468 1,396 3,959 6,203 2,871 1,582 6,763 7,417 4,267 6,637 4,234 6,404 2,196 1,219 8,198 2,886
959 2,676

1,411 4,664 3,049 12,618 45,826 1,264 3,190 6,203 2,353 1,597 6,450 9,013 3,752 6,637 3,854 5,226 2,022 1,235 6,797 2,861
979 2,405

Civil

Filed

Disposed

1,092 626
3,426 1,680 27,001
112 66,418 49,773
5,326 85
887 1,072
80 0 0 803 196 54 231 9 11 73

1,433 338
5,446 1,381 23,314
110 61,763 33,180
5,472 46
654 946
63 0 0
358 273
75 127
9 15 32

Total

Filed

Disposed

7,990 5,511 8,760 19,912 87,500 2,851 76,406 73,460 13,587 2,321 10,560 10,279 4,905 8,817 6,999 10,919 3,098 2,387 10,209 2,895 1,355 3,165

6,831 5,487 11,650 18,910 76,115 2,638 71,417 58,016 12,012 2,359 10,095 11,757 4,111 8,817 6,333 8,352 3,024 2,500 8,511 2,870 1,389 2,758

The state courts of Lowndes and Muscogee Counties did not submit civil caseload data. Caseload for the State Court of Spalding County is for the last two quarters of calendar year 1989. 'The State Court of Treutlen County did not separate misdemeanor from traffic cases in the casecount of criminal actions.

Fiscal Year 1990 13

JUVENILE COURTS

The 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 a delinquent 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 1511-3 to authorize a circuit-based juvenile court system and specify state salary supplements for circuits estab-

lishing judgeships on that geographical basis. However, since the legislature has not yet appropriated funds to implement this act, the state's 15 full-time and 35 parttime 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.
In all cases, except in Floyd County, juvenile court judges are appointed by superior court judges of the circuit for a four-year term. (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 caseloadfor calendar year 1989 is presented by county in the table on the following pages.

Seventeenth Annual Report 14

Calendar Year 1989 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

106

86

19

14

29

13

II

10

169

!56

20

14

80

70

280

235

120

89

68

56

885

860

18

16

39

31

82

61

68

46

126

109

98

90

71

58

12

10

199

!59

23 408 206
23 1,620

24 368 185
19 1,083

7

5

47

45

264

222

643

639

7

7

1,032

616

14

8

1,722

993

244

!50

212

178

196

183

89

88

232

230

13

5

148

141

37 16 !50 3,092 63

33
II
142 2,092
48

42

32

951

832

400

377

71

59

2

2

117

110

711

67

35

13

54

19

15

2

231 484
94 34 6,595

229 408 71
30 3,774

41

30

7

7

561

555

257

229

62

57

Unruly Filed Disposed

23

18

5

4

2

2

I

I

12

12

6

4

7

7

178

!49

15

12

19

16

161

!57

3

3

7

6

10

7

36

25

37

36

0

0

13

13

6

3

133

!09

I

I

186

96

48

46

16

14

332

222

4

4

23

23

67

60

173

173

4

4

3744

194

6

6

843

665

34

27

28

26

46

46

26

25

72

72

2

0

21

21

18

17

4

0

25

23

1,222

920

15

14

7

6

130

124

197

!83

9

9

0

0

37

35

10

8

5

4

22

19

6

5

105

105

325

274

76

68

2

2

1,399

892

16

10

0

0

230

227

160

!54

19

17

Traffic Filed Disposed

13

13

6

6

0

0

0

0

45

44

7

5

38

35

166

!53

II

7

5

3

259

259

I

l

I

I

I

I

II

4

12

8

15

13

8

6

5

5

20

19

0

0

116

115

58

57

0

0

694

347

0

0

0

0

258

217

116

115

I

I

691 0
1,518 105 8

482 0
1,351 52 8

163

!53

3

3

101

101

7

6

36

33

5

5

0

0

20

20

1,552

970

19

16

3

3

237

201

16

!6

9

4

0

0

21

21

33

32

3

l

0

0

I

0

173 283 121
15 1,390

173 259 110
15 1,150

I

4

4

102

102

16

16

9

9

Deprived Filed Disposed

30

21

27

13

30

17

10

10

145

163

10

9

45

42

174

!55

3

0

9

8

87

75

16

16

15

12

II

10

24

19

25

12

53

50

40

22

7

4

97

77

22

28

143

115

46

39

14

12

684

434

3

2

0

0

158

134

179

178

14

14

556

434

II

9

464

374

13

l

78

56

23

19

17

13

96

96

10

10

50

37

18

16

4

2

40

38

1,016

659

0

0

17

14

186

162

129

100

0

0

8

8

16

9

9

8

22

23

16

16

10

4

56

56

178

140

69

39

21

16

966

636

18

18

0

0

128

128

110

108

23

20

Special Proceedings Filed Disposed

4

3

4

4

10

8

0

0

44

44

3

3

47

41

55

41

7

5

3

2

459

400

l

0

0

0

15

12

9

7

9

4

15

14

21

16

0

0

21

19

0

0

5

2

26

24

2

2

126

24

3

2

4

4

56

51

75

74

2

2

254 1455

0

0

270

228

5

4

14

14

33

21

4

4

68

68

0

0

12

10

4

4

6

3

20

20

442

271

7

7

3

3

17

10

76

71

7

7

0

0

7

6

4

4

0

0

14

13

4

I

25

25

!54

143

15

10

3

2

592

319

II

7

I

I

18

18

31

28

6

6

Total Caseload Filed Disposed

176

141

61

41

71

40

22

21

415

419

46

35

217

195

853

733

!56

113

104

85

4,851 39 62 119 148

1,751
36 50 91 101

209

169

181

167

!53

115

30

22

470

383

46

53

858

696

384

351

55

47

3456 2110

17 74 803 1,186 18

13 72 684 1,179 18

2,907 31
4,817 401 340

1,871 23
3,611 234 282

461

422

139

133

569

567

32

21

367

242

82 30 255 7,324 104

75 16 243 4,912 85

72 1,521
818 96 10

58 1,329
747 79 10

198

181

127

119

65

41

106

67

36

12

590 1,424
375 75 10,942

588 1,224
298 65 6,771

87 12 1,039 574 119

66 12 1,030 535 109

F i s c a I Year 1 9 9 0 15

Calendar Year 1989 Juvenile Court Caseload (Number of children)

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

Delinquent Filed Disposed

31

30

1,082

800

39

29

463

453

5

1

30

29

38

23

75

63

48

32

291

282

353

271

22

17

36

42

8

6

55

54

25

25

16

15

48

42

58

52

12

8

215

201

72

69

321

245

20

15

II

3

356

196

4

0

63

61

49

21

10

10

54

44

33

14

55

55

15

14

60

57

87 13 40 118 1,442

73 13 34 61 1,212

329

280

50

46

25

25

190

178

66

62

23

15

35

27

28

26

130

118

42

35

11
5 30 20 1,536

11
4 23 13 1,385

302

272

20

20

62

58

20

13

347

288

65

55

19

14

191

191

6

4

0

Unruly Filed Disposed

2

1

394

271

11

11

182

182

1

0

2

2

15

14

5

4

2

0

171

171

142

103

4

4

13

15

2

I

38

38

5

5

12

12

I

0

23

19

2

2

210

209

15

14

117

98

I

1

5

3

64

19

2

0

10

10

9

7

5

5

18

13

13

12

2

2

4

4

7

7

20

20

5

5

6

6

86

56

616

516

127

103

11

11

3

2

120

116

15

15

II

6

9

4

15

14

53

51

8

5

0

0

0

0

3

3

2

2

306

297

52

50

3

3

17

17

2

1

94

80

11

10

10

8

47

47

3

2

1

Traffic Filed Disposed

20

19

955

837

30

29

224

224

8

7

0

0

24

23

19

19

9

9

87

87

395

357

4

4

20

21

15

12

9

9

3

3

7

7

39

38

13

10

1

1

63

63

34

34

114

98

20

22

8

6

60

37

0

0

6

6

36

35

5

5

21

18

4

4

12

12

I

1

3

3

33

24

2

2

12

11

18

14

502

440

130

124

27

27

8

8

45

45

0

0

7

7

0

0

8

8

0

0

0

0

I

1

2

2

8

5

3

3

114

107

164

142

4

3

0

0

1

I

62

51

45

42

0

0

27

27

1

0

4

4

Deprived Filed Disposed

0

0

304

226

58

52

118

96

8

3

57

49

7

6

23

2

23

9

51

49

359

329

6

2

16

18

30

26

9

9

14

II

II

4

48

35

32

20

9

8

58

17

1

1

48

52

7

7

18

0

73

7

12

9

31

31

20

9

1

I

7

I

28

23

75

75

13

4

18

17

16

5

7

7

16

14

29

24

426

365

209

155

14

8

16

15

34

23

29

22

23

20

19

10

15

II

101

67

5

4

30

20

5

5

14

7

11

11

206

133

57

46

8

8

18

18

3

2

103

95

31

20

2

2

33

33

0

0

Special Proceedings Filed Disposed

5

4

468

308

27

22

47

47

I

I

13

II

5

4

4

3

2

2

53

53

55

53

5

4

0

0

4

3

0

0

11

II

2

2

5

2

19

12

3

3

12

8

20

16

0

5

0

0

3

2

5

I

3

2

4

1

7

0

0

0

1

0

6

6

30

30

3

3

12

12

19

16

3

3

2

1

32

21

242

119

147

124

23

23

18

16

65

51

30

29

1

10

1

4

3

25

20

5

4

0

0

1

I

2

1

9

9

75

56

87

77

2

0

0

0

3

0

64

54

16

12

1

0

18

17

0

0

0

0

Total Caseload Filed Disposed

58 3,203
165 1,034
23

54 2,442
143 1,002
12

102

91

89

70

126

91

84

52

653

642

1,304 41 85 59
Ill

1,113 31 96 48 110

58

55

48

40

141

117

145

113

27

22

558

498

142

134

600

498

48

45

45

14

558

260

21

II

114

109

121

72

21

21

101

76

84

59

174

174

36

26

100

96

175 30 76 283 3,228

138 30 66 176 2,652

942

786

125

115

70

66

454

413

140

128

65

49

73

42

70

62

309

256

60

48

42 13 57 45 2,237

32 12 39 38 1,978

662

587

37

34

97

93

29

17

670

568

168

139

32

24

316

315

10

6

7

6

Seventeenth Annual Report 16

Calendar Year 1989 Juvenile Court Caseload (Number of children)

County
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

Delinquent Filed Disposed

85

66

8

8

122

108

34

32

284

247

245

207

90

85

3

2

21

21

789

646

49

34

48

44

21

14

107

97

126

124

385

369

304

160

6

6

26

22

134

123

I

0

16

12

30

2

338

274

12

12

25

19

21

18

68

32

35,865 27,220

Unruly Filed Disposed

26

13

0

0

18

14

6

4

70

47

56

48

4

4

0

0

12

12

286

253

8

8

12

11

3

3

41

41

74

74

166

!59

100

67

0

0

I

I

18

15

0

0

I

I

11

0

287

249

5

5

3

3

0

0

18

10

11,410 9,177

Data was not submitted for Jefferson County.

Traffic Filed Disposed

8

6

2

2

13

13

8

8

98

95

59

57

0

0

5

4

19

18

68

29

12

10

11

11

18

12

46

45

84

84

99

98

45

34

3

3

0

0

17

16

I

I

4

3

2

0

298

265

I

I

22

14

4

4

29

27

13,005 10,771

Deprived Filed Disposed

19

13

28

26

2

2

44

42

46

42

31

11

61

39

4

4

13

8

260

224

16

10

16

7

20

8

62

56

33

31

178

157

109

76

4

3

6

6

88

88

2

2

15

7

11

4

165

140

0

0

7

6

20

18

15

0

10,848

8,349

Special Proceedings Filed Disposed

8

6

2

2

3

2

9

9

23

20

10

4

39

36

0

0

7

6

23

16

2

2

6

4

5

3

17

17

45

45

96

74

46

33

4

4

0

0

32

31

0

0

4

2

5

I

170

132

0

0

3

3

I

I

11

3

5,463 4,027

Total Caseload Filed Disposed

146

104

40

38

158

139

101

95

521

451

410 194
12 72 1,426

327 164
10 65 1,168

87

64

93

77

67

41

273

256

362

358

924

857

604

370

17

16

33

29

289

273

4 40 59 1,258 18

3 25
7 1,060
18

60

45

46

41

141

72

76,591 59,544

Fiscal Year 1990 17

_ - - - ..... ... ~,-~.~.

. . ~--------------------

PROBATE COURTS

Located 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 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 matter.
Probate court judges are elected to four-year terms in countywide, partisan elections. A candidate for office must be at least 25 years of age, a high school graduate, aU. S. citizen, and a county resident for at least two years preceding the election. In counties with a population over 100,000, candidates must fulfill additional qualifications concerning age and 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.
Fiscal year 1990 civil caseload data voluntarily submitted by 89 probate courts and calendar year 1989 criminal caseload data voluntarily submitted by 50 probate courts exercising criminal jurisdiction are presented in the tables on the following pages.

Seventeenth Annual Report 18

Fiscal Year 1990 Probate Court Civil Caseload (Docket entries)

County
Baker Baldwin Banks Barrow
Bartow Ben Hill Bibb Bleckley
Brantley Bryan Bulloch Butts
Candler Cherokee Clarke Clay*
Clayton Clinch Cobb Coffee
Colquitt Coweta Crawford Dawson
Decatur DeKalb Dodge Dooly
Dougherty Douglas Early Echols*
Emanuel Evans Fannin Fayette
Forsyth Fulton Gilmer Grady
Greene Gwinnett Hall Haralson
Henry Houston Jasper Jones
Laurens Lee Liberty Lowndes
Macon McDuffie Miller Mitchell
Monroe Muscogee Oconee* Oglethorpe
Paulding Polk Putnam* Quitman

Administration
1 14 11 12
46 23 66 5
14 16 29 8
6 19 49 2
76 9 215 25
18 32
1 4
20 604
10 11
38 36 4 0
29 4 9 12
15 458
10 21
5 88 53 36
41 47 6 14
17 4 49 94
16 6 15 15
7 164
0 5
31 15 2 6

No Admin istration Necessary
1 9 1 6
18 4 28 1
2 3 3
I
2 16
11
0
37 2 45 14
19 9 2 2
4 143
7 2
13 11 0 0
21 0 6 5
5 302
2 9
6 36 21 0
18 14 3 1
21 2 3 17
2 4 1 3
4 19 2 8
6 6 4 0

Probate

Common

Solemn Guardianship

0

12

2

4

89

54

0

21

4

0

61

34

5

142

52

I

47

18

17

442

87

2

27

4

24

7

1

19

17

4

94

14

3

33

5

4

21

18

12

136

31

14

214

90

0

9

I

9

286

336

0

9

2

39

824

345

2

61

27

0

99

11

3

135

65

0

17

13

0

11

10

0

64

24

180

1,950

1,290

3

36

8

1

31

10

20

189

83

0

126

81

2

29

6

2

0

1

64

29

0

22

2

1

36

15

3

82

28

0

93

28

237

1,500

1,186

2

29

8

0

41

14

9

30

12

14

457

311

16

205

44

2

91

18

9

122

83

5

212

106

1

22

6

8

40

11

I

78

15

3

26

15

3

42

55

8

182

42

11

44

10

0

73

19

0

25

6

I

52

8

4

35

25

21

506

250

0

8

1

0

22

8

8

88

26

4

116

31

I

2

3

0

9

2

Year's Support
0 2 11 7
11 3 45 1
3 3 5 1
1 13 7
I
46 1
74 2
8 15
I
2
2 190
3 4
12 28 0 0
3 1 8 12
9 128
8
I
2 52 14 12
13
7
I
8
2 0 9 17
1 8
2 80 0 6
10 4 0 0

Hospitalization
11 213
7 25
82 17 69 0
0 19 20 8
0 41 61 0
70 0 149 0
33 59 0 15
32 240
5 7
108 18 6 0
20 6 0 0
3 19 4 38
21 66 64 36
17
71 3 7
83 4 47 37
8 29 0 5
6 115
1 16
0 62 0 4

Habeas Corpus
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 7 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 26
1 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
21 0 0 0
0 0 0 0

Licenses Marriage Pistol

10

22

377

161

67

85

249

240

473

544

190

102

1,590

731

127

134

100

66

84

136

332

183

123

177

80

20

558

598

616

366

13

22

2,316 63
4,612 331

1,301 25
2,777 231

384

100

552

470

61

45

70

100

245 4,676
175 72

49 3,111
79 59

992

564

868

568

80

96

9

4

225

165

95

64

116

134

454

416

420 6,971
139 173

455 5,361
137 73

95 3,167
862 238

98 2,456
649 322

453

575

972

538

60

63

148

242

393

356

128

141

635

89

833

309

101

113

160

149

49

15

158

102

147

147

2,018

735

29

31

67

107

504

375

394

288

41

30

14

17

Total Civil
59 923 207 634
1,373 405
3,075 301
217 298 684 359
!52 1,424 1,435
48
4,447 111
9,080 693
672 1,340
140 214
440 12,410
327 197
2,019 1,736
223 16
557 194 325 1,012
1,028 16,164
339 370
278 6,647 1,928
755
1,331 1,972
165 479
966 323 932 1,539
306 448 112 345
398 3,908
72 239
1,048 920 83 52

F i s c a I Year 1 9 9 0 19

Fiscal Year 1990 Probate Court Civil Caseload (Docket entries)

County
Randolph* Richmond Rockdale Seminole
Spalding Tattnall Taylor* Telfair
Terrell Thomas Tift Towns
Troup* Turner Twiggs* Union
Walton Ware Washington Wheeler
White Whitfield Wilkes Wilkinson
Worth
TOTALS

Administration
3 124 16 10
25 14 2 5
8 32 15 11
14 10 11 18
27 32 6
3
6 26
8 11
13
3,168

* Incomplete Submissions 89 counties reporting.

No Administration Necessary
0 60 21
3
18 2 I 4
2 4 3 3
17 1 3 19
14 21
5 4
3 23
1 1
4
1,204

Probate Common Solemn Guardianship

0

11

3

34

414

117

19

111

105

4

22

6

4

128

67

0

34

20

I

16

0

0

29

3

3

26

2

2

112

17

4

60

9

1

27

9

10

115

33

2

35

25

3

18

7

3

22

14

10

101

62

3

110

20

5

34

6

0

4

3

1

24

5

2

205

26

0

34

7

2

28

14

4

51

16

818

11,385

5,762

Year's Support
0 142
8 0
14 2 0 0
0 6 4
14 1 2 3
14 10 2 2
2 19 0 2
2
1,172

Hospital- Habeas ization Corpus

0

0

167

0

19

0

18

0

45

0

13

0

12

0

4

0

2

0

273

0

33

0

1

0

47

0

4

0

20

0

0

0

51

0

39

1

6

0

1

0

20

0

28

0

13

0

0

0

20

0

2,951

58

Licenses Marriage Pistol

22 1,601
611 649

26 1,162
533 60

659

480

118

136

34

19

92

95

75

129

435

466

381

255

62

51

318

288

85

53

33

58

135

114

314

303

395

263

109

77

41

33

140

67

356

345

71

20

84

94

146

142

47,720

33,187

Total Civil
65 3,821 1,443
772
1,440 339 85 232
247 1,347
764 166
856 216 155 328
896 894 250
91
268 1,030
154 244
398
107,425

Seventeenth Annual Report
20

Fiscal Year 1990 Probate Court Criminal Caseload (Docket entries)

County
Baker Banks Barrow Bartow
Ben Hill Bleckley Brantley Butts
Charlton* Clay* Crawford Dawson
Dodge Dooly Echols* Fannin
Fayette Gilmer Greene Haralson
Harris Henry Jasper Laurens
Lee Macon McDuffie Monroe
Oconee* Oglethorpe Paulding Polk
Quitman Randolph Seminole Taylor*
Telfair Terrell Thomas Towns
Turner Twiggs* Union Walton
Washington Wheeler White Whitfield
Wilkes Wilkinson
TOTALS
* Incomplete submissions 50 counties reporting.

Misdemeanors Filed Disposed

0

0

161

!55

0

0

495

495

43

31

0

0

32

32

!50

137

0

0

51

49

103

68

135

102

17

5

36

17

0

10

129

102

6

5

61

70

165

165

72

39

0

0

57

97

0

0

182

!57

0

0

0

0

0

0

308

271

3

3

21

21

349

322

52

54

81

81

0

0

0

0

29

24

42

24

69

80

17

25

30

34

0

0

31

31

35

31

23

21

90

75

9

9

0

0

0

0

91

97

77

52

3,252

2,991

Traffic Filed Disposed

723 704 2,374 6,282

697 709 2,374 7,286

917 1,071
767 1,486

841 1,819
767 1,283

997 300 1,332 914

997 273 1,277 888

1,256 3,518
53 753

1,069 3,933
53 604

2,276 960
2,454 2,730

2,132 1,105 2,454 1,816

3,180 5,730 1,275 4,523

3,018 5,882 1,275 4,114

1,393 786
2,693 11,588

1,081 300
2,506 9,767

303 872 1,495 2,197

301 836 1,265 2,219

508 260 1,290 765

509 262 1,235 612

1,252 1,932
0 213

1,227 1,775
0 181

1,962 379 642
4,670

1,860 379 429
4,585

201 963 472 6,538

198 961 339 6,538

888

947

446

375

91,283

87,353

Total Caseload Filed Disposed

723 865 2,374 6,777

697 864 2,374 7,781

960 1,071
799 1,636

872 1,819
799 1,420

997 351 1,435 1,049

997 322 1,345 990

1,273 3,554
53 882

1,074 3,950
63 706

2,282 1,021 2,619 2,802

2,137 1,175 2,619 1,855

3,180 5,787 1,275 4,705

3,018 5,979 1,275 4,271

1,393 786
2,693 11,896

1,081 300
2,506 10,038

306 893 1,844 2,249

304 857 1,587 2,273

589 260 1,290 794

590 262 1,235 636

1,294 2,001
17 243

1,251 1,855
25 215

1,962 410 677
4,693

1,860 410 460
4,606

291 972 472 6,538

273 970 339 6,538

979

1,044

523

427

94,535

90,344

Fiscal Year 1990 21

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; issuing distress warrants and dispossessory writs; trials for county ordinance violations; trials for misdemeanor violations of bad check laws; holding preliminary hearings; and issuing summonses, arrest warrants and search warrants.
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.
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. 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 initial40-hour course for certification and all magistrates must satisfy an annual 20-hour continuing education requirement.
The Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council formulates the curricula for the seminars and sets the standards for certification, and the training courses are coordinated by the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education.
As provided by law, judges of other limited jurisdiction courts may also serve in the capacity of magistrate in the same county. At the end of fiscal year 1990, 28 probate judges, three civil court judges, three juvenile court judges and referees and one state court administrator also served as chief magistrate or magistrate.
Fiscal year 1990 magistrate court caseload is presented on the following pages for 147 counties submitting data. Submission of data is required by the Uniform Magistrate Court Rules.

Seventeenth Annual Report 22

Fiscal Year 1990 Magistrate Court Caseload (Cases filed)

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

Warrants Issued
921 272 490 119 2,646
422 2,603
927 1,120 9,770
612 275 514 747 3,693
1,234 281
1,873 633
3,799
2,346 540
6,339 5,361 10,081
149 9,557
446 17,886 4,666
2,556 1,658 1,089 4,408
226
1,743 823 595
1,490 19,505
1,701 534
7,653 4,608
525
28 733 1,472 985 407
658 796 3,182 1,914 894
17,341 536 60
5,660 3,544
1,067 449
10,586 2,405
287

Bond and Commitment
Hearings
582 6
370 92
378
48 216 574
0 5,956
247 91
420 166 181
33 73 1,523 230 101
579 474 4,348 2,367 2,671
52 11,182
12 1,852
65
331 272 173
12 50
627 536 190 528 35,910
0 131 539 !51
I
6 118 563 759 92
123 509 1,158 261 301
30,123 II 0
215 671
213 293 3,365 4,707 163

Criminal Cases
Filed Disposed

717

424

II

23

346

60

39

26

0

0

22

17

22

132

457

457

0

0

944

340

233

298

72

52

128

109

I

5

2

2

0 73
6 57 2,274

0 45
6 33 2,274

!51 131 2,461
0 141

!09 138 1,348
0 0

2 261
0 3,309
42

2 279
0 3,593
42

0 4,015
0 1,524
24

0 3,489
0 637
23

625 0 0 0
2,551

439 0 0 0
2,551

127

19

0

0

0

0

342

247

0

0

0

0

239

171

0

0

446

409

231

139

61 553 2,142 315 208

83 452 1,487 306
99

29,656 406 0 820 13

23,171 0 0
812 13

395 18
1,146 1,385
147

395 9
1,051 1,385
74

Civil Claims Filed Disposed

488 225 434 120 3,513

178 205 !56
43 2,336

236 668 999 632 3,022

220 451 822 433 2,418

248 183 385 423 1,612

265 168 243 344 2,285

665 89 545 245 2,257

635 68 211 72
1,848

448 219 7,957 1,472 1,384

802 216 5,395 1,035 1,318

48 2,220
218 3,961 1,405

55 1,516
240 2,544
63

1,889 1,004
362 1,732
126

43 894 390 1,182 163

650 !57 552 849 4,788

642 133 455
0 1,852

516 456 3,869 1,233 471

146 288 3,869 1,146 471

23

18

533

533

681

566

792

592

381

57

337 935 2,722 591 629

255 805 1,647 587 413

5,728 320 67
1,535 1,444

3,381 26 26
1,392 813

931 611 3,716 2,269 900

850 598 3,896 2,196 900

Other

Total Warrants

Civil Cases

and

Filed Disposed Filings

190 62 229 32 2,372

190 62 229 32 2,372

2,316 570
1,499 310
8,531

80 736 916 293 1,627

80 736 916 293 1,627

760 4,029 3,299 2,045 15,363

165

165

1,258

21

21

551

172

172

1,199

146

146

1,317

801

801

6,108

276 46 334 96 1,573

276 46 334 96
1,573

2,175 489
2,758 1,031 9,903

421 108 8,916 1,399 2,294

421 108 8,916 1,399 2,294

3,356 998
25,673 8,232 13,900

17 10,503
108 1,621
808

17 10,503
108 1,621
808

216 22,541
772 26,777
6,921

676

676

5,121

511

511

7,188

227

227

1,678

997

997

8,661

41

41

417

643

643

3,661

89

89

1,069

87

87

1,234

419

419

2,758

91

91

26,935

367 163 3,977 1,230 121

367 163 3,977 1,230 121

2,711 1,153 15,499 7,413 1,117

2

2

53

169

169

1,674

404

404

2,557

441

441

2,664

193

193

1,212

47 459 2,410 319 250

47 459 2,410 319 250

1,103 2,743 10,456 3,139 1,981

53,529 56 14
1,697 726

53,529 56 14
1,697 726

106,254 1,318 141 9,712 5,727

283 343 9,384 2,042 334

283 343 9,384 2,042 334

2,676 1,421 24,832 8,101 1,668

Total Hearings and Dispositions
1374 296 815 193 5,086
365 1,535 2,769
726 10,341
975 332 944 661 3,269
944 232 2,074 431 5,796
1,911 936
20,007 4,801 6,283
126 23,480
360 19,610
978
1,050 5,166
790 2,828
277
2,351 758 732 947
40,404
532 582 8,385 2,774 593
26 991 1,533 2,201 481
508 2,225 6,702 1,473 1,063
110,204 93 40
4,116 2,223
1,741 1,243 17,696 10,330 1,471

Fiscal Year 1990 23

Fiscal Year 1990 Magistrate Court Caseload (Cases filed)

County
Haralson Harris Hart 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 Monroe
Montgomery Morgan Murray Musco gee Newton
Oconee Oglethorpe Paulding Peach Pickens
Pierce Pike Pulaski Putnam Quitman
Rabun Richmond Rockdale Schley Screven
Seminole Spalding Stephens Stewart Sumter
Taliaferro Tattnall
Taylor t
Telfair Terrell
Thomas Tift* Toombs Towns Treutlen

Warrants Issued
1,088 581 886
2,236 5,956
421 2,103
255 959 1,001
419 290 777 781 472
3,139 498
2,582 166 334
7,439 652 787 693 183
1,244 457
1,239 271 878
304 548 1,277
0 2,810
387 283 1,199 1,297 1,140
938 379 391 581 55
661 9,928 1,913
144 192
304 3,453 2,415
254 2,171
55 612 427 779 342
2,703 3,188 3,146
284 550

Bond and Commitment
Hearings
72 173 125 3,418 3,031
5 160 90 1,228 472
35 29 57 123 0
3,066 192 726 47 145
2,136 419 201 446 114
185 392 22
0 93
40 410
11 0 770
3 61 453 669 0
227 193 185 688 30
6 2,382 1,695
115 42
58 3,311
27 12 415
0 221 56 247 286
913 137 41
4 125

Criminal Cases
Filed Disposed

0

0

5

4

215

138

536

398

334

409

0

0

I

I

0

0

517

473

173

141

0

0

39

30

0

0

I

I

0

0

958

958

52

51

0

0

4

4

11

8

1,672

77

327

119

126

2

123

113

0

0

126

126

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

3 85 24 0 1,595

3 5 24 0 1,118

51

47

2

2

78

180

33

34

196

1

0

0

10

9

0

0

0

0

0

0

0 7,638 1,585
26 70

0 7,614
878 0 70

23 1,098
404 0 27

31 1,677
362 0 27

0

0

285

217

0

0

0

0

108

108

1,527 38
1,186 0 0

1,333 19
788 0 0

Civil Claims Filed Disposed

317 379 578 1,182 1,410

181 326 219 1,058 1,392

379

147

779

947

205

202

828

826

936

936

455

351

293

266

722

376

439

451

237

!53

1,204 381 584 379 84

2,024 309 628 199 88

2,642

322

307

151

448

352

459

244

162

120

772

479

340

250

878

878

250

0

852

640

225

225

477

394

762

707

1,673

741

1,167

711

236

176

221

202

673

471

449

208

322

282

201

126

232

103

370

246

1,015

833

34

34

279 6,324
879 109 628

327 2,052
437 15
628

278 1,959
962 87 1,509

153 1,619
679 12
1,508

57

0

678

460

171

171

646

565'

359

294

2,673 859 903 164 134

2,178 207 715 155 116

Other

Total Warrants

Civil Cases

and

Filed Disposed Filings

136 201 264 638 1,706

136 201 264 638 1,706

1,541 1,166 1,943 4,592 9,406

144

144

944

503

503

3,386

136

136

596

453

453

2,757

340

340

2,450

184

184

1,058

162

162

784

220

220

1,719

202

202

1,423

57

57

766

997

997

6,298

!54

154

1,085

626

626

3,792

180

180

729

20

20

449

2,438 104 290 87 83

2,438 104 290 87 83

14,191 1,390 1,651 1,362
428

505

505

2,647

68

68

865

316

316

2,433

43

43

564

420

420

2,150

49

49

581

249

249

1,359

362

362

2,425

40

40

1,713

914

914

6,486

233

233

907

64

64

570

309

309

2,259

333

333

2,112

86

86

1,744

122

122

1,261

49

49

670

130

130

891

383

383

1,979

1

1

90

70 5,774
972 43 270

70 5,774
972 43 270

1,010 29,664 5,349
322 1,160

93 2,901
243 38 981

93 2,901
243 38
981

698 9,411 4,024
379 4,688

3

3

115

166

166

1,741

69

69

667

372

372

1,797

185

185

994

1,110 580 568 19 82

1,110 580 568 19 82

8,013 4,665 5,803
467 766

Total Hearings and Dispositions
389 704 746 5,512 6,538
296 1,611
528 2,980 1,889
570 487 653 777 210
7,045 706
1,980 430 261
4,973 793 845 890 317
1,295 710
1,216 43
1,153
317 1,058 1,104
781 3,513
459 329 1,413 1,244 369
475 354 561 1,904 65
403 17,822 3,982
173 1,010
335 9,508 1,311
62 2,931
3 1,064
296 1,184
873
5,534 943
2,112 178 323

Seventeenth Annual Report
24

Fiscal Year 1990 Magistrate Court Caseload (Cases filed)

County
Troup Twiggs Union Upson Walker
Walton Ware Warren Washington Wayne
Webster Wheeler Whitfield Wilcox Wilkes
Wilkinson Worth
TOTALS

Warrants Issued
2,013 430 492
1,119 1,922
2,826 2,422
126 1,182
889
81 263 6,639 194 358
471 1,171
298,935

Bond and Commitment
Hearings
8 249
17 56 623
380 1,077
I II 316
78 35 25 60 112
148 162
162,384

Criminal Cases
Filed Disposed

19

19

29

42

148

56

25

0

252

246

910 2,198
0 233 542

910 2,190
0 178 542

0

0

0

0

538

416

43

32

2

0

9

5

0

0

85,541

69,511

Civil Claims Filed Disposed

5,904 270 282 893 964

4,704 220 49 77 589

833 564 240 1,442 491

673 520 123 1,383 587

42 174 2,200 240 474

51 43 1,753 209 468

605

605

402

402

142,736 102,522

* Incomplete submissions.
t Includes estimated data for the third and fourth quarters of fiscal year 1990.
147 counties reporting.

Other

Total Warrants

Civil Cases

and

Filed Disposed Filings

4,461 70 30
595 636

4,461 70 30
595 636

12,397 799 952
2,632 3,774

1,512 813 135 663 280

1,512 813 135 663 280

6,081 5,997
50! 3,520 2,202

8 54 1,312 91 176

8 54 1,312 91 176

131 491 10,689 568 1,010

174

174

1,259

!58

!58

1,731

159,811 159,811 687,023

Total Hearings and Dispositions
9,192 581 !52 728
2,094
3,475 4,600
259 2,235 1,716
137 132 3,506 392 756
932 722
494,228

OTHER COURTS

Along 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. 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 incorpo-
rated 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.

Fiscal Year 1990
25

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, demographics and special 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 10 superior court district administrative judges complete the council's membership.
The full council meets at least twice each year, as it did in December 1989 and June 1990, 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.
The Judicial Council continued its contract with the 10 judicial administrative districts for district personnel to conduct the annual casecount. Raw data obtained by the districts was analyzed by the Administrative Office of the Courts and the results were submitted to the council for use in evaluating requests for additional superior court judgeships.
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 fiscal year 1990, the council recommended to Gov. Joe Frank Harris and the General Assembly the creation of thirteen new superior court judgeships in the following judicial circuits (they are listed in the council's recommended order of priority): Flint (third), Atlanta (fourteenth), Coweta (fourth), Ocmulgee (fourth), Augusta (sixth), Atlanta {fifteenth), Macon (fifth), Cobb (eighth), South Georgia (third), Brunswick (fifth), Stone Mountain (tenth), Atlanta (sixteenth) and Gwinnett (sixth).
The General Assembly approved one new judgeship each for Atlanta, Augusta, Coweta, Flint and Ocmulgee judicial circuits.
At the end of the 1990 fiscal year, the council authorized the Administrative Office of the Courts to study 1989 caseload data to determine the need for new superior court judgeships for the Atlanta (requesting three judgeships), Blue Ridge, Brunswick, Chatta hoochee, Cobb (requesting two judgeships), Eastern, Griffin, Gwinnett, Lookout Mountain, Macon, Middle, Northeastern, Ogeechee, Rockdale, South Georgia and Stone Mountain judicial circuits.
The Electronic Data Processing Committee (EDP) is charged with making recommendations to the Judicial Council to provide 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 the year, the EDP committee proposed that
the state's computer network be used to provide the trial courts with electronic access to Supreme Court and Court of Appeals opinions. The committee also planned to ask the Legislative Services Committee to allow the state court system electronic access to the Georgia Code. A new electronic jury selection system, developed with help from the Department of Administrative Services, was implemented in the offices of superior court clerks in 60 Georgia counties.

Seventeenth Annual Report 26

The Judicial Council approved five revisions to the rules of the Board of Court Reporting, as recommended by the board.
Members also voted to adopt the Jury Standards Committee's new Georgia Jury Standards. Over the year, the committee exarriined the American Bar Association Standards Relating to Juror Use and Management, the variance in use and management procedures in Georgia and how other states have addressed the issues. As a result, the committee developed standards patterned after the ABA standards with commentary appropriate for Georgia's needs.
Administrative Office of the Courts
The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) provides fiscal, communications, research and staff support services for the state court system and serves as liaison with other state and national judicial agencies. The AOC also serves as staff to the Judicial Council, working closely with its chairperson, the chief justice of the state Supreme Court.
Fiscal support The administration and operations division performs
fiscal support services that involve coordinating the judicial branch appropriations request and serving as accounting officer for 13 judicial agencies. The fiscal office coordinates payroll, accounts payable, cash management, purchasing, inventory control, personnel records and financial reporting functions for these agencies.
In fiscal year 1990, the AOC's fiscal section managed 60 separate funding sources comprising all or part of six of the eight budget units in the judicial branch. These funding sources included 26 state fund allocations, 13 federal grants and 21 fee or other revenue accounts amounting to over $5.6 million.
Information exchange Information dissemination to judges, court support
personnel and public and private judicial organizations comprised another facet of services provided. The

exchange and release of information was accomplished primarily through the production of publications, including the Georgia Courts Journal, a periodical that informs readers of changes in court procedure, judicial personnel appointments and elections, recent legislation, local and national court management activities and other events. During fiscal year 1990, four issues of the Courts Journal were published and distributed to more than 3,000 local, state and national officials.
The AOC prepared and distributed nine weekly issues of the Judicial Legislative Log, a digest of courtrelated legislation, to approximately 700 judges, county officers and court administrative personnel during the 1990 session of the Georgia General Assembly. Legislation of interest to the judiciary was monitored and tracked for judges and clerks' committees.
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 Sixteenth Annual Report on the Work ofthe Georgia Courts.
Six issues of the Public Relations Digest - abstracts of news and feature items about the judiciary - were compiled and circulated to members of the Judicial Council to gauge public opinion about court activities and to identify matters of concern.
Various other communications efforts included press releases and supplying the media with information on request.
Research, court services The research and 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.
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 spent $73,500 on a manual count of calendar year 1988 cases in the superior and juvenile courts.
Calendar year 1988 data submitted by district personnel was audited and analyzed in terms of circuit

Fiscal Year 1990 27

workloads and presented to the Judicial Council to formulate recommendations on the need for additional superior court judgeships. A study was also conducted concerning a request to either divide Flint Circuit or add a new judgeship.
Reports were generated on district, circuit and county caseloads in response to individual requests for caseload information. Open caseload reports were also compiled for the 45 superior court circuits. Following an analysis of the number of open cases, the staff estimated average processing times for each judicial circuit and judges were notified about their circuit's ranking on this measure and other criteria. Chief Justice Clarke recognized 10 circuits for having the best overall open case record as shown in the report. They included Atlanta, Atlantic, Dublin, Gwinnett, Oconee, Ogeechee, Rockdale, South Georgia, Southwestern and Waycross.
The AOC continued to work with the councils of state, probate and magistrate court judges to encourage the development and compilation of quarterly summary caseload reports for each class of court
Salary surveys of superior, state, juvenile, probate and magistrate court judges and personnel were conducted to provide court officials, on request, with statewide staffing and salary data. Another survey determined, for the first time, the number, location and other relevant information on existing county law libraries funded by court fees.
In other efforts, U.S. census information on county population by race, age and sex was prepared for use by the courts in jury selection programs.
Other requests for information were answered including a report to the State Bar on the court system's current structure and jurisdiction. Caseload projections were made for facilities studies being conducted by the State Court of Cobb County and Douglas Judicial Circuit. Numerous inquiries on the state of court technology including how Georgia preserves court records and how video is used during trial proceedings were handled.
The AOC research staff cooperated with the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council and other state criminal justice agencies to establish, with Georgia State University, a statistical analysis bureau. The bureau is intended for public policy and analysis research of issues of concern to the criminal justice community.

EDP/GCAC The Judicial Council's Electronic Data Processing
(EDP) committee was staffed, in part, by personnel from the AOC. The group finished implementation of the superior court clerk's personal computer network. Each superior court now has access to information from the secretary of state's office, statewide electronic mail and word processing capabilities.
In response to the EDP committee's continuing efforts to plan for computer technology in Georgia's courts, House Resolution 849 was introduced to and approved by the 1990 General Assembly. It created the Georgia Courts Automation Commission (GCAC), which was charged with addressing the methods of generating, transmitting, using and retaining information to properly automate the courts. The commission was composed of members from the appellate and trial courts and other state agencies. A grant was obtained from the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council to fund the commission's activities and a full-time project manager was assigned.
An organizational meeting was held in April and the commission then began to conduct a study to determine specific requirements and needs within the court system. That study continued through the end of the fiscal year.
Secretariat, publications, administrative services 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 its benchbook.
AOC staff worked with three Council of Superior Court Judges' committees in their efforts to update judges' trial manuals and adopt rules for court procedures. The staff gave editorial and administrative support to the Committee on Pattern Jury Instructions for the ongoing update to the criminal and civil charge books and the Benchbook Committee for its continuing revision to the Superior Court Criminal Benchbook. Other staff services were provided to the Uniform Rules Committee in submitting proposed rules changes to the council, State Bar and the Supreme Court.

Seventeenth Annual Report 28

Fiscal year 1990 AOC special projects:
Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System -
Staff, administrative and technical support was given to this Supreme Court-ordered commission as it investigated possible gender bias in the state judiciary. Areas of investigation included the unequal application of procedural and substantive law, treatment of judicial employees, domestic relations, domestic violence, criminal law, child support and custody, judicial selection, codes of conduct and the formal language of the courts. AOC staff coordinated public hearings where testimony and information were gathered from professionals and the public. The information will be used to prepare a report on the commissions' findings and recommendations for the Supreme Court. The AOC also operated as an information arm of the commission by making presentations to various groups about the commission's efforts throughout the year. The commission is composed of 30 members, including judges, court officials and community and business leaders.
Governor's Conference on Justice in Georgia - Judge
John H. Ruffin, Jr. chaired the Court Reform Committee of the conference which met in May 1990. AOC personnel staffed the committee and provided information used in the compilation of issues critical to future reform in Georgia's courts. The committee determined that the courts' most critical issue is the inefficiency of overlapping jurisdiction. The group recommended that the superior, state and juvenile courts be merged into one trial court to streamline the system. Numerous other issues were defined and solutions were offered as part of this exercise to provide the governor with an agenda of issues and recommended solutions for future budget and program planning.
Law Related Education Consortium- Judges and court
officials were encouraged to volunteer their time to promote a better understanding of laws and individual responsibilities in Georgia.
Jury Standards Committee - This committee was staffed
with AOC personnel who prepared a comparison of Georgia's statutes relating to jury selection. They also assisted in a final draft of the standards, which were modeled after the American Bar Associations' standards but included commentary specific to the state.

Records Retention - The state court system was repre-
sented by AOC staff on the State Records Committee to develop records retention schedules for records retained by the courts.
Duties of the Administrative Office of the Courts
(OCGA 15-5-24)
1) Consult with and assist judges, administrators, cledcs of court and otherofficers and employees ofthe CoQrtpertaining to matters relating to court administration and provide such services as are requested
2) Examine the ldministrative and business methods and systems
employed in 1f1e ofmes related to aJ1d servingtheCoQrts and titak:e
I'CCOIIliJleDdalions for neceJsary iJnpmvement
3) Compile statislica1 andfinancial data and other infonnation on the judicial worlc of the courts and on the wodc of other: offices
related to and 5erving the courts, wbich sball be provided by the courts
4} Examine the state of the dockets and practices and procedUres
of the courts aJ1d make recommendations fortheexpedilion oflm-
gation
S) Act as: fiscal officerand prepare and submit budget estimates of
state appropriations necessary for the maintenance and operation of the judicial system
6) Perfonn IIUch additional duties as may be assigned by the Judicial Council
7) Prepate and publish an amtual report on the work of the courts and on the activities of the Administrative Offtce of the Courts
8) Receive grants from any source, public or private, and expend funds and perfonn services in acco!dance with the renns of any grant
9} Prepare, publish and distribute, from ~ to time, "tudies and reports relating to the administration ofjusliee,impose real()nable charges for such reports wbere appropriate on either an individual or subscription basis and retain any proceeds of such charges
10) Provideclerical, teebnica1, research orother assistance to individual courts to enable tbem more effectively to discbar:ge their duties
II) Enter into contracts as neceJsary to perfomi its other duties.

Fiscal Year 1990 29

- --~---~~~~-----------

BOARD OF COURT REPORTING
The Board of Court Reporting operates under authority of the 1974 Georgia Court Reporting Act to assist the state's judiciary by insuring minimum 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.
If certain conditions are met, 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 timed 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.
The board held two tests during the fiscal year. In September 1989, 164 people took the "B" test, with 52 passing to become certified. Of the 16 who took the "A" test. two passed.
In March 1990, 203 people took the exam. The ''A'' test was not dictated. Thirty-five people passed the "B" test and two of those were upgrading their certificates to ''without backup.'' The marked increase in the number

of applications was due to a previous change in the rules concerning eligibility for temporary permits.
For the first time since the board began testing in 1974, it disqualified a test applicant for cheating during the March exam. The applicant was banned from testing for a two-year period.
As of June 30, 1990, there were 983 certified court reporters in the state. Twenty-one reporters held temporary judicial permits and 26 were working under temporary board permits. A total of 54 temporary permits were issued during the year.
Nine reporters, most from other states, received Georgia certificates and another was upgraded to "without backup" by virtue of passing national exams.
Three complaints were filed during the year although none resulted in hearings.
The board issued two opinions relating to court reporting. One declared that if any party in an arbitration case does not participate in payment for the takedown at the outset, he or she cannot thereafter order a transcript without the consent of the party or parties who paid for the takedown. The board also unanimously agreed that the law does not require the signature of a witness to be notarized on either the deposition jurat or errata sheet.
A major issue handled by the board involved rules . revision to eliminate the use of open microphones as a backup during the certification exam. This action was taken in response to letters from a number of certified professionals as well as the lack of technical skills showing up throughout the testing process. Any person already tested will be allowed four testing periods to become certified with a backup. No new applications are being accepted for testing with backup after January 1991. The effective date of the new rule was Jan. 1, 1991.
The Judicial Council approved a request by the board to change the requisite number of characters per line in official transcripts from 65 to 63, matching federal guidelines which will allow Georgia reporters to buy standardized paper. The council also approved a per diem raise for official court reporters from $75 to $100, effective July 1, 1990
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 two-year terms of office, and the Judicial Council appoints new members to fill any vacancies. Each person must have accumu-

Seventeenth Annual Report 30

lated 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.
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 workers' compensation law. Spring seminar topics included medical technology, an overview of work done by the Electronic Data Processing Committee of the Judicial Council and a presentation on the newly formed Georgia Courts Automation Commission. At the seminar, a Court Reporters Recommendation Committee was formed to address the concerns of the court reporting community with respect to electronic advancements within the court system. A report produced by the committee was presented to the Electronic Data Processing Committee on Court Reporting.
Legislation tracked by GCCRA during the fiscal year focused on House Bill 1055, an amendment to OCGA 9-11-30(b)(4) that attempted to eliminate the need for a court order to take video depositions. It would have opened the door for any person to act in place of the court reporter during such depositions. A write-in campaign was launched and the bill died in committee.
GCCRA publishes a newsletter on at least a quarterly basis for all certified court reporters. They also publish a directory of all certified court reporters in Georgia which is made available to members of the association and is for sale to attorneys and other court personnel.
Council of Juvenile Court Judges
(Annual Report for fiscal year 1990, as required by OCGA 15-11-4.)

Continuing education for judges is mandated by the General Assembly. Seminars addressing special concerns of juvenile court judges are conducted twice yearly by the Institute for Continuing Judicial Education. The 51 juvenile court judges and 31 juvenile court associate judges (formerly referees) are required to attend at least one of these seminars. The council maintains records to certify that all juvenile court judges have attended training sessions.
The annual conference of the National Council of Family and Juvenile Court judges was held in Atlanta during July 16-21, 1989. Judge Romae T. Powell of Fulton County presided at the conference as national president for 1988-89.
Two council programs received national recognition including "Unique and Innovative Project: Purchase of Services for Juvenile Offenders" and "Outstanding Educational Program: Permanent Homes for Children.'' Judge Aaron Cohn of Columbus received the award for "Meritorious Service to the Juvenile Courts of America by a Judge'' and Chris Perrin, Executive Director of the Georgia Council of Juvenile Court Judges, was recognized in the non-judicial category for "Meritorious Service to the Juvenile Courts of America."
The council also provided staff support to the 1990 Governor's Conference on Justice in Georgia which took place May 2-4, 1990 in Atlanta. Juvenile court judges were involved in the public education issue component and the court reform component. The conference sought to identify issues in seven critical areas to guide the state in planning efforts in the decade ahead.
Together with the Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS), the council co-sponsored ''Children in Court: A Systems Approach'' which was held in Savannah Aug. 28-29, 1989. This conference provided training for Special Assistant Attorney Generals, judges, private attorneys and caseworkers who are involved in court actions relating to the child welfare system. Topics covered included medical aspects of child abuse cases, termination of parental rights and liability issues.

The Council of Juvenile Court Judges is a judicial branch agency whose membership includes all judges of the courts exercising jurisdiction over juveniles. Council staff provide support to juvenile courts through specialized programs and grants designed to assist local courts in the role of protecting the best interests of children and the state.

Substance abuse program The Adolescent Substance Abuse Program (ASAP)
continued operations for the second year in the juvenile courts of Cobb, Douglas, Floyd and Gwinnett counties. ASAP provides a systematic means to identify, screen and assess juvenile probationers who have substance abuse problems or are at risk for developing one. The

Fiscal Year 1990 31

number of youths pre-screened by June 30, 1990 totalled 884.
Data gathered in ASAP's first year of operation indicate that slightly more than 51 percent of juvenile offenders abuse substances, primarily alcohol and marijuana, and of those using, 35 percent use regularly. For many, identification of a drug problem occurs for the first time in ASAP.
At the end of the program's first 12 months, 55 percent of the youths assigned to ASAP for an individualized treatment program had successfully completed their recommended plan with 12 percent still undergoing treatment. Another 17 percent had moved to another county or were released from probation. Only 17 percent dropped out of ASAP or were dismissed for failure to comply with program requirements.
In June 1990 the council was awarded a grant of $1 million for expansion of the Adolescent Substance Abuse Program. When implemented, the grant will fund new ASAP units and provide expanded treatment services to juvenile substance abusers.
The council was invited to make a presentation on the ASAP program at the Alcohol, Drug and Mental Health Administration Conference held in Washington, D.C., Oct. 2-4, 1989. Practitioners from across the country attended the conference to learn about innovative treatment programs.
Purchase of Services Program The council's Purchase of Services for Juvenile Of-
fenders 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 2,503 children were referred for services by their judge or court worker during fiscal year 1990. A total of $225,165 was spent in fiscal year 1989 with an average expenditure per child of $89.96. Of total expenditures, 57 percent was for symbolic restitution and community service jobs; 29 percent for counseling and diagnostic testing; 13 percent for tutorial sessions and 1 percent for transportation and temporary housing.
Reimbursement funds ($25,000) for the Purchase of Services program were appropriated for the first time by the General Assembly during the 1990 session. The increased funds will allow for expanded local efforts to provide services to children in their own communities.

Permanent Homes Program During fiscal year 1990, Permanent Homes for
Children in Georgia staff provided technical assistance to citizen review panels in 29 counties. These panels reviewed foster care arrangements for more than 2,500 children who had been temporarily removed from their homes by the juvenile court
Panels are comprised of community members appointed by the local juvenile court judge. During fiscal year 1990 500 volunteers served on panels. After interviewing all parties (children, parents, caseworkers, etc.) the panels make recommendations regarding future arrangements for returning the child to his or her family or continued out-of-home placement
The Fifth Annual Georgia Conference on Permanency Planning was held in Atlanta Oct. 27-28, 1989. "Citizen Review Panels: The Children's Voice" provided the focus of discussion. Speakers included Fulton County Commission Chairman Michael Lomax, Andrew Vachs, a child advocate from New York City and Congressman J. Roy Rowland. The conference offered workshops and panel discussions on sexual abuse, crack cocaine, foster parents, housing and other related topics. Approximately 250 individuals attended the sessions, including juvenile court judges, citizen review panel members, court coordinators, DFCS caseworkers and Council of Juvenile Court Judges staff.
The council made plans for expansion of the Permanent Homes Program to provide increased staff support for current panels and expansion to additional counties. The General Assembly appropriated $300,000 in new funds to begin this effort.
The Permanent Homes Program published two newsletters during fiscal year 1990. The first issue addressed treatment of physically abusive parents, working with sexually abused children and neglectful parents. The second issue focused on jobs for parents with limited skills and the public housing system.
Juvenile Information System The Juvenile Information System expanded from 19
to 20 on-line courts with the addition of Fayette County to the automated juvenile tracking system. This telecommunications link between the council and juvenile courts will ultimately enable counties to access the council's statewide database and obtain complete prior legal histories for juvenile offenders.
The automated courts submitted more than 100,000 juvenile records to the council via tape media. An

Seventeenth Annual Report 32

additional 25,000 juvenile records were received and entered into the council's database from over 120 nonautomated courts.
In fiscal year 1990 council staff demonstrated the Juvenile Information System for juvenile court judges and the clerks of juvenile courts at their respective spring conferences.
Four additional meetings provided the automated courts user's group with ongoing technical and software support. Project staff also developed a troubleshooting manual and user directory for the automated courts.
Job descriptions were developed and a salary survey was conducted to compare government-level data processing positions. The survey revealed that county data processing personnel earn significantly less than their state level peers. The council also conducted a survey of personnel from automated courts to determine their perceived training needs. As a result, regional training sites were established.
Juvenile Justice Project 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 has received $45,000 in federal funds from the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council. Twenty-one workshops were held during the year addressing such topics as stress management, introductory family counseling, adolescent suicide, adolescent gangs, intake services and adolescent sexual offenders. More than 5,159 training hours were provided to 98 independent juvenile court direct service providers and for 557 employees of the Division of Youth Services.
Legislation Legislation affecting the juvenile courts that passed
in the 1990 session of the General Assembly included: an act providing for judicial orders establishing a case plan for reunification of a child placed in foster care with his or her family and for either judicial or citizen panel review of foster care cases; a provision that no child alleged to be or found to be unruly for the first time may be detained in a secure juvenile detention center unless

the child fails to appear for a hearing or is a runaway; and a provision for imposing a ''probation/supervision fee'' against a child placed on probation or informal adjustment, with such fees to be earmarked solely for funding community-based services for children under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. The General Assembly also authorized a change from the term ''juvenile court referee" to juvenile court associate 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 ofjustice, 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 chief magistrates and magistrates and was authorized to develop a constitution and bylaws. Bylaws were promulgated and adopted during fiscal year 1990.
The council's executive committee, comprised of six officers, two representatives from each of the 10 judicial administrative districts and two members at large, carries out the administrative duties of the council.
The council met four times in fiscal year 1990. Each meeting consisted of a business session and a training program on a planned topic of interest.
During the 1990 General Assembly, the council's legislative agenda included salary and retirement issues.
The council's publication, Georgia Magistrate Court Benchbook, was again supplemented. This supplement was distributed to each magistrate in office. A benchbook with supplement was given to those who attended the 40-hour training course for new judges.

Fiscal Year 1990 33

Council of Probate Court Judges

Georgia Indigent Defense Council

The 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 retired judges of the probate courts, the council has developed uniform rules, uniform forms and a benchbook.
The council met four times during fiscal year 1990, three times in conjunction with meetings of the County Officers' Association of Georgia and once in Athens for training and the annual election of officers. During the year the council, through a contract with a sitting judge, continued to work toward publication of the Handbook for Probate Judges. The council also contracted with a law student to begin work on an update of the Georgia Probate Court Benchbook.
Council of State Court Judges
Originally 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.
The council seeks to coordinate its activities with the other councils of trial court judges in order to assure some "vertical uniformity" in the court system as well as ''horiwntal uniformity'' within each class of courts. In developing the uniform rules in particular, state court judges have worked closely with superior court judges to establish a degree of uniformity in their recommendations to the Supreme Court.
In addition to two general meetings held during fiscal year 1990 in conjunction with the spring and fall continuing education programs, the council has an active committee system. This includes standing committees on racial and gender bias, mandatory continuing judicial education, uniform rules and criminal sanctions and facilities.

The Georgia Indigent Defense Council (IDC) was created by an act of the state legislature in 1979 to provide a program of legal representation for indigent defendants. The council is composed of 13 people appointed by the Supreme Court including one lawyer from each of the 10 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 government to support local indigent defense programs; 2. to recommend uniform guidelines within which local indigent defense programs will operate; 3. to provide local programs and attorneys who represent indigents with technical and research assistance, clinical and training programs and other administrative services; and 4. to prepare budget reports and management information required for implementation of the Georgia Indigent Defense Act. In March 1989 and April1990 the General Assembly appropriated $1 million for the Georgia Indigent Defense Council for the 1990 and 1991 fiscal years. The council has made two awards of state funds to counties. In 1989, 115 counties were awarded state appropriated funds to assist with the operation of their indigent defense programs. In 1990, 119 countiescovering 85 percent of Georgia's population- received
awards. All county commissions, superior court judges and
bar association presidents are notified of the availability of state funds to assist their local indigent defense program. The guidelines and application forms are mailed to each local governing committee and the chief judges of those counties without local committees. The council answers inquiries from throughout the state and also initiates contact with counties that have not initially expressed awareness of or an interest in participation.
The council adopted guidelines for the operation of local indigent defense programs covering appointment of counsel on a timely basis; eligibility determinations and criteria to qualify indigents; standards for the operation of public defender offices, panel attorney programs and hiring of contract defenders; appointed attorney fees; procedures to insure the independence of court-appointed

Seventeenth Annual Report 34

counsel; the role and responsibility of local indigent defense governing committees and the mechanism for distribution of state-appropriated funds.
Seven meetings were held by the council since June 1989 to assure the speedy and equitable distribution of funds to counties in both 1989 and 1990.

arrest warrants. Twenty-hour participants received instruction on judicial ethics and discipline, civil issues, evidence, family violence, gender bias and garnishment

Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council
(Annual Report for calendar year 1990, as required by OCGA 15-10-134.)
The 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 sponsored two 40-hour seminars and seven 20-hour regional training sessions for magistrates during 1990. A total of 447 magistrate court judges were certified in calendar year 1990.
Magistrates attending the 40-hour program took part in a variety of training modules, including instruction in legal research, reviewing the new benchbook, judicial ethics and discipline, civil claims, torts and proof of damages, bookkeeping, historical role and functions of magistrates, 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

Georgia Magistrate Courts Training Council:
1990 Seminars

.lhlk
Feb. 4-9 May2-4 May 16-18 June 6-8 June20-22 July 11-13 July 25-27 Aug. 8-10 Sept. 16-21

Las:aliau
Athens Tifton Athens Savannah Decatur Athens Dalton Savannah Athens

limn:s A~Ddi:llli

40

13

20

69

20

60

20

67

20

58

20

56

20

36

20

63

40

25

Institute ofContinuing Judicial Education
More than 2,600 judges, court officials and judicial personnel attended programs delivered by the Institute of Continuing Judicial Education (ICJE) in fiscal year 1990, a record number for the third year in a row.
Georgia ranked tenth among states with professional education programs for state court personnel 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.

Fiscal Year 1990 35

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 initial training and 12 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 annual20-hour recertification course. Superior court clerks are also required to complete 40 hours in basic certification and 15 hours in recertification training courses.
In fiscal year 1990, the institute offered its traditional calendar of training seminars. In place of biannual, pre-service courses for orientation of newly elected probate, state and superior court judges, a specialty course was conducted targeting judges representing the four tiers of Georgia courts that handle underage drug and driving under the influence offenders. Judges of non-jury traffic courts were also provided a new course which will likely evolve into an annual offering.
In response to creation of the personal computer network for superior court clerks, court officials prompted the institute to sponsor workshops for clerks of superior courts and their deputies. Another course introduced superior court judges to a variety of judicial applications for personal computers. Also, the ICJE's first advanced course targeted judicial applications for personal computers.
In response to a statutory mandate that jury lists be revised every two years, an intrastate satellite teleconference was conducted in June targeting jury commissioners, court administrators and clerks of superior courts. It focused on helping these court officials with the revision of jury lists. In the future, new jury commissioners will have access to the print and video materials that were developed out of this project. The materials are intended to help orient the commissioners to their new jobs.
In fiscal year 1990 an operating budget of $582,500 was appropriated. The budget included these allotments: $20,000 for national travel of superior court judges; $125,500 to the Magistrate Courts Training Council for administration and training of magistrate court judges and clerks and $437,000 for administration and continuing operations of ICJE.
The University of Georgia Law School continued its

Institute of Continuing Judicial Education Fiscal Year 1990 State-based Instructional Activities

Prgaram 20-hour recertification course for magistrate uttjUdges
Annual S6'flliu for superior
court judges 20-hour reCertification course for magistrate court judges 20-hour recenification course
for magistrate court judges 40-hour certification course for magistrate court jUdges CorreQ.ionaJ facili~SJOUT for state and
superior eourt jUdges Juvenile court jUdges fall ,eminar Annual fall seminar for Georgia
Association of Independent Juvenile Courts Pan seminar for adminiStrative law judges Paculty development specialty course Pall seminar for superior counjudges Fall seminar for superiOr ooun clerlc.s Pan seminar for ptobate c.Ourt judges Fan seminar for state coutt judges 40-hour certification course for magistrate court judges Alcohol sidety workshop for judges Annual seminar for judicial secretaries Workers' compensation course for administrative law judges Faculty development for magistrate court judges Spring seminar for superior court clerks Spring seminar for probate court judges

J.oeatioJi Dam Attadm

Athens

)uly 12-14 35

St. Simons July 23-26 133

Savannah Aug. 2-4 54

Dalton

Aug. 16-18 34

Athens Sept. 11-15 27

Macon Rome

Sept. 13-15 6 SepL 18-20 60

Augusta Sept. 27-29 106

Athens 0cL 2-4

64

Athens

OcL22-25 20

Athens

OcL 22-'1:/ 137

Sav&nnah Nov. 15-17 125

Savannah Nov. tS-17 76

HiawasJee Dec.6-8

52

Athens

:Feb. 4-9

14

Forsyth Peb. 21-23 30

Atlanta March 7-9 105

Decatur March 19-21 25

Athens

March 19-21 is

Cordele Aprilll-13 14S

Athens

AprillS-20 14S

Seventeenth Annual Report 36

(CIIIIIiul/l'tlllt page 36) COrrec:tional facilities tour for state and superi~ court judges 20-hOur rec:Crtification course formagislrate counjudges Sprina sCminar for stM8 counjuclges Sprina seminar for juvsile court judges
20-hour recertification course for magistra~e court judges Amlual seminar for juvf.llile
courtdcrb Spring seminar for Georgia
Association of Independent Jlivf.llile Court Traftw court jud&es s=illaf 20-bour recertification course for ma,istra~e court judp 20-hour r~rtification ~
formagi~tou;njudges
Superior coUrt clerk's computer course

Vidalia April10

14

rifton

May2-4

68

St;Simons May7-9

60

Jekyll Island May 14-16 78

Athens

Mayl6-18 60

Forsylh

May 21-22 63

Savannah Mayl3-2S. 1:20

Hels

May 29-31 77

Savannah J~6-8

69

Decatur June20-22 59

Varions locations. and daJes .

contribution of resources including office and storage space, telephone equipment and other administrative support.
Of 46 applications received for financial aid to attend national courses, 42 were granted some level of funding (usually 80 percent) and 41 people took advantage of the assistance. The followingtable lists the institute's state-based instructional activities.
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 from the Superior Court Clerk's 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.

JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATIVE DISTRICTS
The Judicial Administration Act of 1976 established 10 judicial administrative districts in Georgia and created district councils, composed of all superior and senior superior court judges within the respective districts. These 10 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 1990. 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 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 government 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 conducted numerous statewide training programs for judicial personnel.
District staff assisted chief judges and clerks in local

Fiscal Year 1990 37

-------------~~~-..------------

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 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 administrator 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 re- sources. 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. ~tudies 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 Superior Court Judges, the Judicial Council of Georgia, the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council and other court-related groups. District court administrators served 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
The Judicial Nominating Commission assists the governor in appointing highly qualified people 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 residency and age requirements. 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.
The commission begins the selection process by seeking nominations from local individuals and leaders among the civic and legal communities. The commission 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.
The nominating body held two meetings in fiscal year 1990 to consider candidates for two vacancies on the Supreme Court and one on the Court of Appeals.
Since 1973, the commission has acted on a total of 183 judgeships including:

Seventeenth Annual Report 38

* 12 Supreme Court vacancies, * 13 Court of Appeals vacancies, * I06 superior court offices, * 43 state court posts, * two municipal court judgeships and *two civil court vacancies. Originally created by executive order of former Gov. Jimmy Carter and continued in the same manner by succeeding governors, the commission is composed of 10 members. Five are 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
The 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 I5, 1984. Grounds for action include: I) 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 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.
In fiscal year 1990 the Judicial Qualifications Commission held 12 regular monthly meetings and disposed of four formal complaints against judicial officers. At the beginning of the year, 33 complaints were pending from fiscal year 1989.
During fiscal year 1990, 134 complaints and 15 requests for opinions were received. At year end, 28 complaints and one request for an opinion were left pending.
One hundred thirty-eight complaints were disposed of during the year for the following reasons: I13 were dismissed as frivolous, unfounded, unsupported or appropriate for appeal; one judge was removed; two judges were publicly reprimanded; II judges were privately reprimanded and two complaints were outside the commission's jurisdiction.
In one formal proceeding the commission recommended that a probate judge be removed from office. The recommendation was approved by the court and the judge was subsequently removed.
In another formal proceeding the commission found that a judge had violated Canon 2(A) by failing to comply with OCGA I5-10-85, which required the timely transmittal of funds to the county treasury, and that he had violated Canon 3B (4) by appointing his wife to the office of clerk of the magistrate court. The commission recommended that he receive a public reprimand for the violations and that his wife's employment be terminated. The recommendation was accepted by the court.

Fiscal Year 1990 39

In a third formal proceeding the commission found a judge of a municipal court to be guilty of violations of Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, and recommended that he be given a public reprimand, a recommendation which was adopted and approved.
Finally, the commission instituted a fourth complaint against a coroner for alleged violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct. However it was held that, because coroners are not judges, they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the commission and the complaint was dismissed.
Known sources of complaints for the fiscal year included 127 litigants or their relatives, two nonlitigants, two judges, one attorney and three others.
Fifteen requests for Advisory Opinions were received. Thirteen formal opinions were rendered, one

request was denied and another was withdrawn. The seven-member Judicial Qualifications Commis-
sion operates under procedural rules revised as of May 1, 1985. All proceedings of the commission- including complaints, conferences, communications and decisions - are confidential, with the exception of notice of a formal hearing, formal hearings, reports recommending discipline and decisions after a hearing in which a judge was found not guilty of misconduct
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.

Synopses of Fiscal Year 1990 JQC Opinions

Opinion 134: In view of the decision in Hudson v. State, 250 Ga. 479, the commission declined to adopt a per se rule which would render it inappropriate for a part-time judge of the recorder's court to represent a criminal defendant in the state or superior court after the case had appeared on the docket in the recorder's court.
Opinion 135: A judge is not per se required to recuse because an attorney, who has filed a lawsuit against the judge, appears as counsel of record, unless the judge is, in fact, prejudiced against the lawyer or, under all the circumstances, the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, in which event, the judge should disqualify.
Lawyers in governmental agencies do not necessarily have associations with other agency lawyers within the meaning of Canon 3(C), but, if the judge is in fact prejudiced, or can reasonably be seen to be so prejudiced, the result would be the same.
Opinion 136: The fact that a former Jaw clerk. is counsel for one of the parties before the court is not a per se grounds for disqualification.
Opinion 137: A part-time judge should not at the same time serve as an assistant district attorney.
Opinion 138: It would not be inappropriate for a judge to serve as a member of an endorsement committee for an organization to be known as "Christians for a Drug-free Atlanta" provided the judge does not permit his or her name to be used in connection with the solicitation of funds for the organization.
Opinion 139: In the opinion of the commission, it is not inappropriate for an administrative Jaw judge to serve on the board of directors of Christian Heritage School, Inc. a non-profit tax-exempt educational organization which maintains a Christian school, provided the judge does not directly or indirectly participate in the solicitation of funds for the school.

Opinion 140: The commission is of the opinion that Canon 3C(l)d requires a judge to disqualify in a proceeding in which the judge's stepson, or a member of the stepson's Jaw firm, is representing one of the parties.
Opinion 141: A judge is not prohibited from making a private personal financial contribution to a candidate for a political office in a partisan race so long as it is done is such a way as not to constitute a public endorsement of the candidate.
Opinion 142: The fact that a part-time judge, who is engaged in the practice of Jaw, currently serves as opposing counsel in two cases which are being handled by counsel for one of the parties in the case before the judge is not per se grounds for disqualification.
Opinion 143: The commission is of the opinion that the donation of profits realized fromthe publication of a book written by the judge in either of two suggested manners would be unobjectionable, provided it is done in such a way as to avoid violating Canon 5B(2) which prohibits the solicitation of funds for any educational, religious, charitable, fraternal or civic organization.
Opinion 144: Neither the payment of the State Bar Legislative Assessment, nor the voluntary contribution to Legal Aid constitutes a payment or contribution to a "political organization" as that term is used in Canon 7A(l) (c), nor do such payments violate any other Canons of the Judicial Code.
Opinion 145: The commission is of the opinion that it would not be appropriate for the judge to serve as the ''judge'' for the purpose of a proposed "Jail-a-Thon" to raise funds for the American Cancer Society.
Opinion 146: Canon 5B(2) prohibits a judge from participating in fund-raising activities without regard to whether his or her judicial position is, or is not, disclosed in the course of such activities.

Seventeenth Annual Report
40

SUPERIOR COURTS SENTENCE REVIEW PANEL

prepares an annual budget, considers revisions to the panel's procedural rules and supervises the activities of the clerk and support staff.

Georgia'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 pre-sentence or post-sentence report. Both the defendant and the district attorney have the right to present written argument relative to the harshness or justification of the sentence.
A defendant may not file more than one application for review of a sentence and the panel's action reducing or declining to reduce a sentence is not reviewable. Panel orders relating to an application are binding on the defendant and the superior court which imposed the sentence.
The panel affirmed 2,804 cases and reduced 72 cases in fiscal year 1990, for a total caseload of 2,876. The reduction rate for the year was 2.5 percent
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

Superior Courts Sentence Review Panel Caseload Summary

Fiscal Year 1990

Pane161 Pane162 Pane163 Panel64 Total

Cases Affirmed
621 741 918 524 2,804

Cases Cases Percent

Reduced Reviewed Reduced

11

632 4.1%

9

750 1.2%

46

964 4.8%

6

530 1.0%

72 2,876 2.5%

10-Year Comparison of Cases Reviewed

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990

Cases Affirmed
1,542 1,846 2,359 2,335 2,137 1,769 2,485 2,273 1,889 2,804

Cases Reduced
145 136 88 119 100 67 63 87 74
72

Percent Reduced
8.6% 6.9% 3.6% 4.9% 4.5% 3.7% 2.5% 3.7% 3.8% 2.5%

COUNCIL OF SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES
The Council of Superior Court Judges is composed of all superior court judges (138) and senior (retired) superior court judges (39). 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.

Fiscal Year 1990 41

JUDICIAL PERSONNEL CHANGES: FISCAL YEAR 1990

Supreme Court
Justice Robert Benham, appointed, Jan. 1, 1990Jan. 1, 1991. Justice Nonnan S. Fletcher, appointed, Jan. 1, 1990Jan. 1, 1991.
Court ofAppeals
Judge Clarence Cooper, appointed, Jan. 1, 1990Jan. 1, 1991.
Superior Courts
Cherokee Judicial Circuit Judge Shepherd L. Howell, appointed, Jan. 17, 1990 -Jan. 1, 1991.
Juvenile Courts
Catoosa County Judge William Shaw Abney, appointed, Aug. 3, 1989- Aug., 2, 1993.
Cobb County Judge James F. Morris, appointed, March 9, 1990March 8, 1996.
Gordon County Judge J. Lane Bearden, appointed, June 12, 1990June 12, 1994.

Probate Court
Baldwin County Judge Mary Helen Dobler, elected, April18, 1990Jan. 1, 1993.
Decatur County Judge Louise Taylor, appointed, April1, 1990- Jan. 1, 1991.
Floyd County Judge Jean P. Duncan, appointed, July 3, 1989 - Jan. 1, 1991.
Meriwether County Judge Robert Lee Todd IV, appointed, Dec. 6, 1989 until next special election. Judge Idus Robertson, elected, Feb. 21, 1990- Jan. 1, 1993.
Schley County Judge Marie M. Giddens, elected, Feb. 21, 1990Jan. 1, 1993.
Chief Magistrates
Douglas County Judge John L. Conley, appointed, Jan. 1, 1990- Dec. 31, 1990.
Early County Judge Tonya Mock, appointed, March 1, 1990- Dec. 3, 1992.

Judicial elections and appointments July 1, 1989 to June 30, 1990

Supreme Court Court of Appeals Superior Courts State Courts
(full and part-time) Juvenile Courts
(full and part-time) Probate Courts Magistrate Courts
(chief magistrates)

Total number judgeships
7 9 148 b 85
50
159 159

Elected
-
-
-
3
-

Ms:l.b!l!l 11[ SdectioD
Appointed
2 1 1 -
3
3 2

New judgeship
-
-
s
-
-
-

Total judges beginning first terms
2 1 1
-
3
6 2

As of June 30, 1990. b Although 148 judgeships had been authorized by the end of the year, only 138 had been filled. Appointments for these new judgeships were suspended pending the outcome of a voting rights lawsuit filed in July 1988.

Seventeenth Annual Report
42