In this mandamus action, the issue is whether the trial court erred by failing to order the appellee, a special prosecutor, to represent a criminal case to a grand jury.* 1 The trial court did not err, as mandamus relief is not available to compel a discretionary act, 2 and as the appellee has broad discretion not to re-present the criminal case to a grand jury. 3 Finally, although Dubose contends that the trial court had the authority to review and correct the grand jury’s and district attorney’s actions under OCGA § 15-6-8 (4), 4 that Code section only authorizes review by a proper writ, such as mandamus or *153 certiorari, 5 and, as we have already held, Dubose is not entitled to relief pursuant to his writ of mandamus.

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Judgment affirmed.