Court Opinion

ID: 9614489
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 04:25:58.619189+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:03:36.554231
License: Public Domain

BARNES, Chief Judge,
concurring fully and specially.
Although I concur fully with the majority opinion, I write separately to emphasize that OCGA § 24-9-61 grants parties “the right to have the witnesses of the other party examined out of the hearing of *575each other.” (Emphasis supplied.) Consequently, allowing the lead investigator to remain in the courtroom during the presentation of the State’s case is an exception to the rule, and the Code section obligates the trial courts to “take proper care to effect this object as far as practicable and convenient. . . .” Id.
Decided September 17, 2007.
Emory B. Bazemore, for appellant.
Spencer Lawton, Jr., District Attorney, George R. Asinc, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.
Thus, even though it is not unusual for trial courts to allow lead investigators to remain in the courtroom, the prosecution has no right to an exception to the rule, and whether to grant the exception requires the exercise of the trial court’s discretion. Welch v. State, 251 Ga. 197, 201 (7) (304 SE2d 391) (1983). The better practice, as suggested in Carter v. State, 271 Ga. App. 588, 590 (610 SE2d 181) (2005), is for the trial court to make some inquiry into the matter and determine whether the exception is warranted before exercising its discretion to grant or deny a request for an exception to the rule.