Hay v. Bright
Opinion
Appellant Samuel Hay III, a private citizen, filed a petition for mandamus relief that would compel appellee Fredric Bright, the District Attorney of the Ocmulgee Judicial Circuit, to prosecute Tommy [155] Craig for alleged perjury committed during a bond validation hearing. The superior court denied appellant’s mandamus petition, and he appeals.
This Court has repeatedly held that:
A citizen does not have a judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or nonprosecution of another and, hence, lacks standing to contest the prosecuting authority’s policies when the citizen is neither prosecuted nor threatened with prosecution.*
It follows that appellant lacked standing to seek mandamus relief that would compel appellee to prosecute Craig. Therefore, the trial court properly denied appellant’s petition.
Judgment affirmed.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
575 S.E.2d 505 (Hay v. Bright) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.