Solomon v. State

206 S.E.2d 436, 232 Ga. 306, 1974 Ga. LEXIS 935
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMay 21, 1974
Docket28859
StatusPublished

This text of 206 S.E.2d 436 (Solomon v. State) 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
Solomon v. State, 206 S.E.2d 436, 232 Ga. 306, 1974 Ga. LEXIS 935 (Ga. 1974).

Opinion

Jordan, Justice.

S. H. Solomon, appellant herein, was convicted of murder in the Grady County Superior Court on September 11,1963, and sentenced to life imprisonment. Appellant filed no direct appeal subsequent to his conviction, and has since served ten years of the sentence imposed.

On November 28,1973, appellant filed a pleading in the Grady Superior Court styled as a "Petition For Writ Of Mandamus” naming the state as respondent. Appellant stated at the hearing on the petition that his purpose in filing the petition was not to get an appeal in hopes of a new trial, but to facilitate his release from prison. The record shows and the appellant admits in his petition that he has served ten years of his life sentence and has gone before the State Board of Pardon and Paroles four times to no avail. On February 15,1974, the trial court denied appellant’s petition. Held:

1. We have carefully reviewed the record and find that a petition for a writ of mandamus in a case such as this could only properly lie against the Board of Pardon and Paroles. Although this can be done in some cases, Riley v. Garrett, 219 Ga. 345 (133 SE2d 367), it will not lie in a situation such as this where appellant’s case has been timely reviewed under the statutes and the board’s regulations.

If appellant’s petition is viewed as being in the nature of habeas corpus we find it to be without merit.

The trial court did not err in denying appellant’s petition.

Submitted May 3, 1974 Decided May 21, 1974. S. H. Solomon, pro se. A. Wallace Cato, District Attorney, Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General, John B. Ballard, Jr., Deputy Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Riley v. Garrett
133 S.E.2d 367 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
206 S.E.2d 436, 232 Ga. 306, 1974 Ga. LEXIS 935, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/solomon-v-state-ga-1974.