Summary
In Howard v. State, 194 Ga. App. 857 (392 S.E.2d 562) (1990), the Court of Appeals ruled that an interlocutory application must be granted in order for an appellate court to review such an action taken by the trial court.
Summary of this case from Smith v. NicholsOpinion
A90A0531.
DECIDED MARCH 13, 1990.
Motion for bail. Henry Superior Court. Before Judge Craig.
Herbert Shafer, for appellant.
Tommy K. Floyd, District Attorney, Thomas R. McBerry, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.
This is a direct appeal from an order denying defendant's motion for pretrial bail. Ordinarily, the denial of a motion for pretrial bail is an interlocutory matter requiring a defendant to follow the interlocutory procedure set forth in OCGA § 5-6-34 (b). See Lane v. State, 247 Ga. 387 ( 276 S.E.2d 644). At one time, pursuant to OCGA § 17-6-1 (c), the legislature provided that the denial of bail in such circumstances was directly appealable. See Foster v. State, 165 Ga. App. 137 ( 299 S.E.2d 420). Accord Merritt v. State, 169 Ga. App. 523, 524 ( 313 S.E.2d 780). Effective July 1, 1988, however, the language allowing for a direct appeal in such circumstances was deleted from the applicable Code section. Ga. L. 1988, pp. 358, 362. Defendant's motion for pretrial bail is not a final judgment as defined in OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1). Since the defendant has not followed the interlocutory appeal procedures set forth in OCGA § 5-6-34 (b), the appeal must be dismissed.
Appeal dismissed. Carley, C. J., and Sognier, J., concur.