O.C.G.A. § 16-11-63 (2019)
Possession, sale, or distribution of eavesdropping devices
(a) Other than law enforcement officers permitted by this part to employ such devices, it shall be unlawful for any person to possess, sell, offer for sale, or distribute any eavesdropping device.
(b) An ‘‘eavesdropping device’’ shall mean any instrument or apparatus which by virtue of its size, design, and method of operation has no normal or customary function or purpose other than to permit the user thereof secretly to intercept, transmit, listen to, or record private conversations of others.
History
(Ga. L. 1967, p. 844, § 1; Code 1933, § 26-3003, enacted by Ga. L. 1968, p. 1249, § 1; Ga. L. 1982, p. 3, § 16.)
Annotations
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Ga. L. 1967, p. 844, § 1 is not violative of U.S. Const., amend. 14. Nixdorf v. State, 226 Ga. 615, 176 S.E.2d 701 (1970).
Cited in State v. Birge, 240 Ga. 501, 241 S.E.2d 213 (1978); Drake v. State, 245 Ga. 798, 267 S.E.2d 237 (1980).
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Use of two-way communication system, known to prisoners, to monitor jail activity. - Use of two-way communication system for monitoring all activity in a jail, operation of such system being known to each prisoner, would not necessarily deprive a prisoner of constitutional
rights, provided there is no interception of conversations between attorney and client. 1970 Op. Att’y Gen. No. U70-84. ‘‘Psychological stress evaluator’’ does not constitute an ‘‘eavesdropping device’’. 1972 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 72-163.
RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. - What constitutes an ‘‘interception’’ of a telephone or similar communication forbidden by the Federal Commu-
nications Act (47 U.S.C. § 605) or similar state statutes, 9 A.L.R.3d 423.