Georgia Statutes
§ 17-8-1 — Cases to be called in order in which they stand on docket; exceptions; preferred scheduling when alleged victim is disabled adult or elder person
Georgia § 17-8-1
JurisdictionGeorgia
Title17
This text of Georgia § 17-8-1 (Cases to be called in order in which they stand on docket; exceptions; preferred scheduling when alleged victim is disabled adult or elder person) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
O.C.G.A. § 17-8-1 (2026).
Text
(a)The cases on the criminal docket shall be called in the order in which they stand on the docket unless the accused is in jail or, otherwise, in the sound discretion of the court.
(b)(1) As used in this Code section, the terms "disabled adult" and "elder person" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Code Section 16-5-100 .
(2)When the alleged victim is a disabled adult or elder person, the prosecuting attorney shall notify the accused if it intends to seek preferred scheduling. The notice shall be in writing and shall:
(A)Allege the specific factor or factors that will inhibit a disabled adult from attending or participating in court proceedings if he or she is a disabled adult; or (B) State the age of the alleged victim if he or she is an elder person.
(3)When notice has been
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
State v. Wooten
543 S.E.2d 721 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2001)
Stewart v. State
713 S.E.2d 708 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2011)
Williams v. State
373 S.E.2d 281 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1988)
Anderson v. State
303 S.E.2d 57 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1983)
Cuzzort v. State
519 S.E.2d 687 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1999)
Kuykendoll v. State
629 S.E.2d 32 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2006)
State v. Grimes
392 S.E.2d 727 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Prince v. State
682 S.E.2d 180 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2009)
Miners v. State
550 S.E.2d 725 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2001)
State v. Finkelstein
317 S.E.2d 648 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1984)
Wooten v. State
533 S.E.2d 441 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2000)
Morrison v. State
546 S.E.2d 312 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2001)
Wilkins v. State
541 S.E.2d 458 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2000)
Culliver v. State
545 S.E.2d 392 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2001)
State v. Jessup
370 S.E.2d 489 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1988)
Gann v. State
303 S.E.2d 510 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1983)
Ramsey v. State
315 S.E.2d 472 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1984)
Taylor v. State
390 S.E.2d 601 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Coleman Riley v. State
(Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2020)
Legislative History
Amended by 2015 Ga. Laws 86,§ 1-5, eff. 7/1/2015.
Nearby Sections
15
§ 17-1-2
Maintenance of penal actions§ 17-10-1-4
Split sentence§ 17-10-10
Concurrent sentencesCite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
Georgia § 17-8-1, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/statute/ga/17-8-1.