O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 16-10-30 (2019)

Refusal to obey official request at fire or other emergency

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A person in a gathering who refuses to obey the reasonable official request or order of a peace officer or firefighter to move, for the purpose of promoting the public safety by dispersing those gathered in dangerous proximity to a fire or other emergency, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

History

(Code 1933, § 26-2606, enacted by Ga. L. 1968, p. 1249, § 1; Ga. L. 2002, p. 660, § 4; Ga. L. 2002, p. 1259, § 11.)

Annotations

Cross references. - Freedom of assembly, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. I, Para. IX. Further provisions regarding willful failure or refusal to comply with

order by policeman or firefighter directing, controlling, or regulating traffic, § 40-6-2.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS O.C.G.A. § 16-10-30 is not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad. Sabel v. State, 250 Ga. 640, 300 S.E.2d 663 (1983). Words sufficiently definite to inform. - ‘‘Reasonable official request,’’ ‘‘dangerous proximity,’’ and ‘‘emergency,’’ when given their ordinary meaning, are words of common understanding that are sufficiently definite to inform a person of common intelligence as to when that person is violating the law. Sabel v. State, 250 Ga. 640, 300 S.E.2d 663 (1983).

Application of O.C.G.A. § 16-10-30 to members of the Revolutionary Communist Party involved in an angry public confrontation with residents of an apartment complex, in the absence of any violent acts, or of efforts of the police to respond directly to any illegal conduct without focusing enforcement efforts on those engaged in speech, was unconstitutional. Sabel v. Stynchcombe, 746 F.2d 728 (11th Cir. 1984). Cited in State v. Burroughs, 244 Ga. 288, 260 S.E.2d 5 (1979).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 53A Am. Jur. 2d, Mobs and Riots, §§ 16, 27. C.J.S. - 67 C.J.S., Obstructing Justice or Governmental Administration, §§ 4, 18. ALR. - Failure or refusal to obey police officer’s order to move on, on street, as disorderly conduct, 65 A.L.R.2d 1152. Validity and construction of statute or ordinance forbidding unauthorized per-

sons to enter upon or remain in school building or premises, 50 A.L.R.3d 340. What constitutes such discriminatory prosecution or enforcement of laws as to provide valid defense in state criminal proceedings, 95 A.L.R.3d 280. Criminal and civil liability of civilians and police officers concerning recording of police actions, 84 A.L.R.6th 89.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1983–1984 · leading case: Sabel v. State, 300 S.E.2d 663 (Ga. 1983).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Sabel v. State, 300 S.E.2d 663 (Ga. 1983). · cites it 20× “See, OCGA § 16-10-30 (Code Ann. § 26-2606). The evidence presented is sufficient to show the following facts: On April 22, 1981, the appellants and some of their colleagues, members of the Revolutionary Communist Party, gathered at the Bowen Homes apartment complex to express…”

Sabel v. Stynchcombe, 746 F.2d 728 (11th Cir. 1984). · cites it 5× “JOHNSON, Circuit Judge: Appellants, members, of the Revolutionary Communist Party, were convicted of violating Georgia’s Refusal to Disperse Statute, O.C.G.A. § 16-10-30, 1 during a political demonstration held at Bowen Homes Apartments on April 22, 1981.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.