Howard v. Lane

581 S.E.2d 1, 276 Ga. 688, 2003 Fulton County D. Rep. 1567, 2003 Ga. LEXIS 476
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMay 19, 2003
DocketS03A0282
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 581 S.E.2d 1 (Howard v. Lane) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Howard v. Lane, 581 S.E.2d 1, 276 Ga. 688, 2003 Fulton County D. Rep. 1567, 2003 Ga. LEXIS 476 (Ga. 2003).

Opinions

Hines, Justice.

Paul Howard, the Fulton County District Attorney, has filed this appeal from the denial of a petition for a writ of prohibition. Finding that this Court is without jurisdiction to address this matter, we dismiss.

The State sought to prosecute Larry McGinty on a felony indictment. McGinty waived his right to a jury trial, and the State objected. The trial court, the Honorable Bensonetta Tipton Lane presiding, overruled the State’s objection. The State then, through Howard, sought a writ of prohibition to prevent Judge Lane from conducting the trial without a jury. The writ was denied. Shortly thereafter, the State sought in this Court a stay of McGinty’s trial, which this Court granted. Subsequently, the State filed its notice of appeal from the denial of the writ of prohibition, and this appeal was docketed in this Court.

It is incumbent upon this Court to inquire into its own jurisdiction. Collins v. AT&T, 265 Ga. 37 (456 SE2d 50) (1995). In OCGA § 5-7-1 (a), the General Assembly has set forth only a limited right of appeal for the State in criminal cases. See State v. Tyson, 273 Ga. 690, 691 (1) (544 SE2d 444) (2001). Accord Moody v. State, 272 Ga. 55, 56 (2) (525 SE2d 360) (2000); Berky v. State, 266 Ga. 28, 30 (463 SE2d 891) (1995). The ruling sought to be reversed does not fall within the provisions of OCGA § 5-7-1 (a).1 Although Howard argues [689]*689that the petition for a writ of prohibition is a separate civil proceeding and that the ruling thereon is final and therefore appealable, see OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1), that does not end the inquiry. As we stated in Rebich v. Miles, 264 Ga. 467-468 (448 SE2d 192) (1994), “the underlying subject matter generally controls over the relief sought in determining the proper appellate procedure.” Here, the underlying subject matter is the criminal prosecution, and the trial court’s ruling entered therein; but for that ruling, the State would not have sought a writ of prohibition. Further, the fact that the first action initiated in this Court, even before the notice of appeal was filed, was to seek a stay of the non-jury trial also shows that the underlying subject matter is the criminal prosecution. And the only matter addressed in the petition for a writ of prohibition was Judge Lane’s order in the criminal proceeding.

Viewing this case in the proper light, it is clear that there is no jurisdiction in this Court. The trial court in a criminal case has made a ruling with which the State takes issue, i.e., that because the defendant has waived a jury trial, a bench trial will take place. The State has not attempted to directly appeal that ruling because it has no right to do so under OCGA § 5-7-1. Rather, the State, in the person of the District Attorney, has attempted to avoid this statute and has attacked the ruling through the device of a writ of prohibition. However, inasmuch as the underlying subject matter is the criminal prosecution and a ruling made therein, and from which the State has no ability to appeal, the appeal must be dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Robert Laguan Scott
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2023
Leitch v. Fleming
732 S.E.2d 401 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2012)
State v. Calvin Rambert
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012
MAGISTRATE COURT DEKALB COUNTY v. Fleming
667 S.E.2d 356 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2008)
State v. Evans
646 S.E.2d 77 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2007)
People v. Owens
183 P.3d 568 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 2007)
State v. Carden
637 S.E.2d 493 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2006)
Lamar County v. E.T. Carlyle Co.
594 S.E.2d 335 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2004)
Howard v. Lane
581 S.E.2d 1 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
581 S.E.2d 1, 276 Ga. 688, 2003 Fulton County D. Rep. 1567, 2003 Ga. LEXIS 476, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howard-v-lane-ga-2003.