Darryl Edward Fowler v. State
This text of Darryl Edward Fowler v. State (Darryl Edward Fowler v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA,____________________ October 26, 2020
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
A21I0065. DARRYL EDWARD FOWLER v. STATE OF GEORGIA.
On May 6, 2020, Darryl Edward Fowler was arrested and charged with enticing a child for indecent purposes and computer pornography and child exploitation. On September 10, 2020, Fowler filed his fourth motion for pre-trial bond, which the trial court denied. Based on the trial court’s order, Fowler argued that denying him a bond violated his Eighth Amendment right, which argument the trial court considered and rejected. Additionally, the trial court concluded that the time limits imposed by OCGA § 17-7-501 were suspended by the Georgia Supreme Court’s Statewide Judicial Emergency orders. The Supreme Court “has exclusive jurisdiction over all cases involving construction of the Constitution of the State of Georgia and of the United States and all cases in which the constitutionality of a law, ordinance, or constitutional provision has been called into question.” Atlanta Independent School System v. Lane, 266 Ga. 657 (1) (469 SE2d 22) (1996); Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. II. Although the Court of Appeals can apply unquestioned and unambiguous constitutional provisions, we have jurisdiction over a constitutional challenge to a state law only “if the law has been held to be constitutional against the same attack being made.” City of Decatur v. DeKalb County, 284 Ga. 434, 436 (2) (668 SE2d 247) (2008).
1 OCGA § 17-7-50 governs the right to a grand jury hearing within 90 days where bail is refused and the right to have bail set absent a hearing within a 90-day period. It does not appear that the particular constitutional attack raised by Fowler has been addressed or considered by the appellate courts, and the trial court’s order implicates the Supreme Court’s Statewide Judicial Emergency Orders. As the Supreme Court has the ultimate responsibility for determining appellate jurisdiction, see Saxton v. Coastal Dialysis & Med. Clinic, Inc., 267 Ga. 177, 178 (476 SE2d 587) (1996), this application is hereby TRANSFERRED to the Supreme Court for disposition.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 10/26/2020 I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.
, Clerk.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Darryl Edward Fowler v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/darryl-edward-fowler-v-state-gactapp-2020.