If the return denies the custody or detention of the person in question, it shall further state distinctly the latest date, if ever, at which custody was had and when and to whom custody was transferred. If it appears that a transfer of custody was made to avoid the writ of habeas corpus, the party making the return may be imprisoned, in the discretion of the judge hearing the case, until the body of the party kept or detained is produced.
§ 9-14-12.Respondent’s return to writ — Statement of transfer of custody; procedure when transfer made to avoid writ
Chapter 14. Habeas Corpus · Article 1. General Provisions · Last amended 1933 · Last verified July 17, 2026
In one sentenceO.C.G.A. § 9-14-12 requires a return denying present custody to state distinctly the last date custody existed and to whom it was transferred, and lets the judge, in the judge’s discretion, imprison a respondent who transferred custody to dodge the writ until the detained person’s body is produced.
Full Text of § 9-14-12
Plain-English Summary
This section picks up where Code Section 9-14-11 leaves off, covering the return that denies holding the detained person at all. A bare denial is not enough. The return has to state distinctly the latest date, if any, on which the respondent did have custody, and when and to whom that custody was transferred. That level of detail gives the applicant and the court a trail to follow when the detained person’s whereabouts are in question.
The second half of the section addresses respondents who transferred custody specifically to dodge the writ — shuffling the detained person off to someone else once habeas proceedings loomed. If it appears that is what happened, the judge hearing the case has discretion to imprison the respondent making the return, and that imprisonment can continue until the detained person’s body is produced. The word choice matters: the statute says the judge “may” imprison, not “shall,” leaving the decision, and its severity as a real consequence, to the judge’s judgment on the facts.
Together with the arrest warrant available under Code Section 9-14-9, this section gives Georgia’s habeas procedure real teeth against a respondent trying to outmaneuver the writ by moving the detained person around.
Frequently Asked Questions
What must a return say if the respondent denies having custody of the detained person?
It must state distinctly the latest date, if ever, on which the respondent had custody, and when and to whom custody was transferred.
What happens if a transfer of custody was made to avoid the writ?
The judge hearing the case may, in the judge’s discretion, imprison the respondent making the return until the detained person’s body is produced.
Is imprisonment automatic once the judge finds the transfer was made to avoid the writ?
No. The statute makes imprisonment discretionary with the judge rather than automatic.
How long can a respondent be imprisoned under this section?
Until the body of the party kept or detained is produced — the statute ties the duration to production rather than setting a fixed term.
Does this section apply if the respondent admits current custody?
No. It applies to a return that denies present custody; a return admitting custody instead falls under the production requirement in Code Section 9-14-11.
Amendment History
Orig. Code 1863, § 3920; Code 1868, § 3944; Code 1873, § 4020; Code 1882, § 4020; Penal Code 1895, § 1221; Penal Code 1910, § 1302; Code 1933, § 50-113.
Source & verification. Section text and amendment history are
reproduced verbatim from the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, published by the
Official Code of Georgia Annotated, Georgia Code Revision Commission / LexisNexis. Last verified July 17, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: georgia habeas corpus transfer of custody to avoid writreturn denies custody habeas corpus georgiaimprisonment for evading habeas writ georgia