Taylor v. Chitwood

Supreme Court of Georgia

Taylor v. Chitwood

471 S.E.2d 511, 266 Ga. 793, 96 Fulton County D. Rep. 2178, 1996 Ga. LEXIS 363

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJune 17, 1996

DocketS96A0627

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 471 S.E.2d 511 (Taylor v. Chitwood) 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

Taylor v. Chitwood, 471 S.E.2d 511, 266 Ga. 793, 96 Fulton County D. Rep. 2178, 1996 Ga. LEXIS 363 (Ga. 1996).

Pincite

Opinions

Fletcher, Presiding Justice.

Patrick Taylor filed a pre-trial petition for writ of habeas corpus contending he was not afforded a first appearance hearing within 72 hours of being jailed in Whitfield County following his extradition from Tennessee and that the bail set was excessive. The trial court denied the writ. Because the failure to hold a first appearance hearing affords no basis for release after indictment and the setting of bail, we affirm.

1. Uniform Superior Court Rule 26.1 sets forth the information a judicial officer must provide an accused within 72 hours of the accused’s arrest pursuant to a warrant. At the hearing, the judicial officer informs the accused of the charges against him, informs him of certain rights he has in further proceedings including the right to remain silent and the right to counsel, and sets bail.¹

The record shows that after Taylor filed this petition, he was indicted and had bail set. We have previously held that there is no judicial oversight of the failure to hold a preliminary commitment hearing following indictment.² Likewise, we conclude that the failure to hold a timely first appearance hearing provides no basis for release once the defendant has been indicted and had an opportunity to seek bail.

Taylor also contends that the failure to hold a first appearance hearing voids later proceedings, including indictment and trial. Taylor has an adequate remedy during trial and on direct appeal of any conviction to raise these issues. Therefore, the trial court properly denied his habeas corpus petition.³

2. Because Taylor has an extensive criminal history, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in holding that bail of $50,000 was not excessive.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Carley, J., who concurs in the judgment only.

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

Fletcher, Presiding Justice.

Patrick Taylor filed a pre-trial petition for writ of habeas corpus contending he was not afforded a first appearance hearing within 72 hours of being jailed in Whitfield County following his extradition from Tennessee and that the bail set was excessive. The trial court denied the writ. Because the failure to hold a first appearance hearing affords no basis for release after indictment and the setting of bail, we affirm.

1. Uniform Superior Court Rule 26.1 sets forth the information a judicial officer must provide an accused within 72 hours of the accused’s arrest pursuant to a warrant. At the hearing, the judicial officer informs the accused of the charges against him, informs him of certain rights he has in further proceedings including the right to remain silent and the right to counsel, and sets bail.¹

The record shows that after Taylor filed this petition, he was indicted and had bail set. We have previously held that there is no judicial oversight of the failure to hold a preliminary commitment hearing following indictment.² Likewise, we conclude that the failure to hold a timely first appearance hearing provides no basis for release once the defendant has been indicted and had an opportunity to seek bail.

Taylor also contends that the failure to hold a first appearance hearing voids later proceedings, including indictment and trial. Taylor has an adequate remedy during trial and on direct appeal of any conviction to raise these issues. Therefore, the trial court properly denied his habeas corpus petition.³

2. Because Taylor has an extensive criminal history, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in holding that bail of $50,000 was not excessive.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Carley, J., who concurs in the judgment only.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

471 S.E.2d 511, 266 Ga. 793, 96 Fulton County D. Rep. 2178, 1996 Ga. LEXIS 363, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-chitwood-ga-1996.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack