Hay v. Bright
Supreme Court of Georgia
Hay v. Bright, 276 Ga. 154 (Ga. 2003)
575 S.E.2d 505; 2003 Fulton County D. Rep. 163; 2003 Ga. LEXIS 8
Sears
Hay v. Bright
Opinion of the Court
Appellant Samuel Hay III, a private citizen, filed a petition for mandamus relief that would compel appellee Fredric Bright, the District Attorney of the Ocmulgee Judicial Circuit, to prosecute Tommy
This Court has repeatedly held that:
A citizen does not have a judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or nonprosecution of another and, hence, lacks standing to contest the prosecuting authority’s policies when the citizen is neither prosecuted nor threatened with prosecution.*
It follows that appellant lacked standing to seek mandamus relief that would compel appellee to prosecute Craig. Therefore, the trial court properly denied appellant’s petition.
Judgment affirmed.
Bartlett v. Caldwell, 265 Ga. 52 (452 SE2d 744) (1995), quoting Scanlon v. State Bar of Ga., 264 Ga. 251, 253 (443 SE2d 830) (1994).
Reference
- Full Case Name
- HAY v. BRIGHT
- Status
- Published