O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 16-10-8 (2019)

False official certificates or writings by officers or employees of state and political subdivisions

✓ 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

An officer or employee of the state or any political subdivision thereof or other person authorized by law to make or give a certificate or other

writing who knowingly makes and delivers such a certificate or writing containing any statement which he knows to be false shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years.

History

(Ga. L. 1959, p. 34, § 16; Code 1933, § 26-2311, enacted by Ga. L. 1968, p. 1249, § 1.)

Annotations

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 63C Am. Jur. 2d, Public Officers and Employees, § 369 et seq. C.J.S. - 37 C.J.S., Forgery, § 27. 67

C.J.S., Officers and Public Employees, § 362.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1995–2007 · leading case: Saleem v. Snow, 460 S.E.2d 104 (Ga. Ct. App. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Saleem v. Snow, 460 S.E.2d 104 (Ga. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “(7) The defendants violated OCGA §§ 16-10-8 and 16-10-20. (8) The BOP breached its duty, in violation of OCGA § 51-1-6, by making laws concerning the eligibility and time-served requirements for parole.”
State v. West, 641 S.E.2d 289 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “In April 2006, the grand jury indicted West for one count each of: making a false statement in violation of OCGA § 16-10-20; false writing in violation of OCGA § 16-10-8; false writing in violation of OCGA § 16-1Q-20; falsifying a public record by a public official in violation…”
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.