SB174: SB174 Conduct of Proceedings in Criminal Trials; legislative intent; provide

Under current Georgia law governing criminal trial procedure, a lawyer generally must formally object to a judge's ruling at the time it happens or risk losing the right to challenge it later on appeal. This bill would add two new sections to that law (O.C.G.A. Title 17, Chapter 8, Article 3) modeled on Rules 51 and 52 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The bill says lawyers no longer need to state formal 'exceptions' to a judge's ruling, but they still must tell the court what action they want or why they object, when they get the chance. If a party never had a chance to object, that silence cannot be used against them later. Minor errors that do not affect a person's substantial rights would be ignored, while 'plain errors' that do affect substantial rights could still be reviewed on appeal even if no objection was made at trial. The law would take effect as soon as the Governor signs it.

• Eliminates the need for formal 'exceptions' to a judge's ruling or order during a criminal trial, per new Code Section 17-8-59(a).
• Requires a party to state the action wanted or the grounds for objection when a ruling is made, in order to preserve the issue for appeal.
• Protects a party from being penalized later if they never had a chance to object to a ruling in the moment.
• Directs courts to disregard trial errors that do not affect a defendant's or party's substantial rights, under new Code Section 17-8-60(a).
• Allows appellate courts to review 'plain errors' affecting substantial rights even when no objection was raised at trial.
• States that the General Assembly intends these sections to follow federal appellate interpretations of similar federal rules, particularly those from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Criminal defendants, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and trial and appellate judges in Georgia's court system, since the bill changes how objections and errors are handled and reviewed in criminal trials statewide.

The bill would change how much a lawyer must say in the courtroom to protect an appeal issue and would let appellate courts fix serious, rights-affecting mistakes even without an objection, while ignoring minor errors, potentially reshaping which criminal appeals succeed.

• Section 1 states the General Assembly's intent to model the new law on Rules 51 and 52 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, following 11th Circuit interpretations where federal circuits disagree.
• Section 2 adds new Code Section 17-8-59, eliminating formal 'exceptions' and setting the standard for preserving a claim of error by informing the court of the desired action or objection.
• Section 2 also adds new Code Section 17-8-60, requiring courts to disregard errors that do not affect substantial rights while allowing review of 'plain errors' affecting substantial rights even without an objection.
• Section 3 makes the Act effective immediately upon the Governor's signature or upon it becoming law without signature.
• Section 4 repeals any conflicting laws.

1. 2025-02-18Senate Read and Referred (Senate)
2. 2025-02-13Senate Hopper (Senate)

• Josh McLaurin (D, SD-014)Primary sponsor

• criminal trials
• court procedure
• appeals
• legal objections
• criminal justice