Legal Opinion

Hamm v. Ray

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided May 30, 2000No. S00A0203PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Carley, Justice.

The State Board of Pardons and Paroles (Board) paroled George Hamm, subject to both standard and special conditions. Thereafter, Hamm filed a petition for writ of mandamus to compel the Board to remove certain of the conditions of his parole. The trial court denied the petition, and Hamm appeals.

1. The Board required Hamm to pay an electronic monitoring fee and to make a $10 monthly payment to the Georgia Crime Victims Emergency Fund. Hamm contends that these two special conditions were not part of the State’s parole regimen at the time of his convictions and, thus, that the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. California Department of Corrections v. MoralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. Roman v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Love v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1999
  4. Fox v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2000
  5. Cannon v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1980

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Chandler v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2007
  2. Thompson v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2004
  3. Madison v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2007
  4. Duke v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2009
  5. Eidson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2003

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API