From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Brown

Supreme Court of Georgia
Oct 19, 2009
686 S.E.2d 760 (Ga. 2009)

Opinion

Nos. S09A1653, S09A1654.

DECIDED OCTOBER 19, 2009. RECONSIDERATION DENIED NOVEMBER 9, 2009.

Habeas corpus. DeKalb Superior Court. Before Judge Hunter. Arlanda Smith, pro se.

Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming, District Attorney, Daniel J. Quinn, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.


Arlanda Smith is the defendant in a pending criminal prosecution. He filed this pre-trial habeas corpus petition raising numerous issues regarding that prosecution, including a claim that the trial court presiding over his prosecution should be recused. The habeas court denied relief on the ground that, because he could assert these issues in his pending criminal case, habeas relief was unavailable to Smith. In these two appeals, Smith contends the habeas court erred. On the contrary, the habeas court properly ruled that Smith could assert all of the claims he raises in his pending prosecution and that "pre-trial habeas corpus relief cannot be predicated" on those claims. Mungin v. St. Lawrence, 281 Ga. 671, 672 ( 641 SE2d 541) (2007); Perera v. Miller, 283 Ga. 583 ( 662 SE2d 544) (2008). Accordingly, we affirm the habeas court's judgment.

Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.


DECIDED OCTOBER 19, 2009 — RECONSIDERATION DENIED NOVEMBER 9, 2009.


Summaries of

Smith v. Brown

Supreme Court of Georgia
Oct 19, 2009
686 S.E.2d 760 (Ga. 2009)
Case details for

Smith v. Brown

Case Details

Full title:SMITH v. BROWN (two cases)

Court:Supreme Court of Georgia

Date published: Oct 19, 2009

Citations

686 S.E.2d 760 (Ga. 2009)
286 Ga. 137

Citing Cases

Williams v. Reece

Because this claim may be raised in [Williams'] pending prosecution, [the claim] may not serve as the basis…

Thomas v. Freeman

Although the trial court incorrectly relied on the Article 2 habeas statutes in ruling on Thomas's petition,…