Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State v. Ruff

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 18, 1985No. 70743Published

1ConcurrenceBenham, Judge

I join my brethren by concurring in the majority opinion, but I choose to elaborate in more detail on my reasons for concurrence.

The majority decision is dictated by two cases. Watts v. Pitts, 253 Ga. 501, at 504 (322 SE2d 252) (1984), states: “We therefore hold that a person who is arrested and released within the time prescribed by law on an appearance bond is not entitled to a commitment hearing.” State v. Middlebrooks, 236 Ga. 52, 55 (222 SE2d 343) (1976), restricts the right to a preliminary hearing as outlined in OCGA §§ 17-4-26 and 17-4-62 by stating that “a preliminary hearing is not…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. MiddlebrooksSupreme Court of Georgia · 1976
  2. Jackson v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1969
  3. Watts v. PittsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1984

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API