O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 16-12-124 (2019)

Removal of baggage, freight, or other items transported by bus or stored in a terminal

✓ 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) It shall be unlawful to remove any baggage, freight, container, or other item transported upon an aircraft, bus, or rail vehicle or stored in a terminal without consent of the owner of such property or the company or its duly authorized representative. Any person violating this Code section shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years.

(b) The actual value of an item removed in violation of this Code section shall not be material to the crime herein defined.

History

Ga. L. 1978, p. 2238, § 4; Ga. L. 1988, p. 415, § 2; Ga. L. 2002, p. 1094, § 5.

Annotations

Cross references. Carriage of baggage by carriers of passengers generally, §§ 46-9-136, 46-9-190 et seq.

Editor’s notes. Ga. L. 2002, p. 1094, § 1, not codified by the General Assembly, provides: “This Act shall be known and may be cited as the ‘Transportation Security Act of 2002.’”

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Evidence sufficient for conviction. - Evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for unlawful removal of baggage from an airport because an airport investigator identified photographs of a person wearing the type

of clothing worn by defendant on the day in question approach the luggage carousal near the time when the missing luggage was supposed to arrive. Keita v. State, 285 Ga. 767, 684 S.E.2d 233, 2009 Ga. LEXIS 478 (2009).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 2009–2009 · leading case: Keita v. State, 684 S.E.2d 233 (Ga. 2009).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Keita v. State, 684 S.E.2d 233 (Ga. 2009). · cites it 2× “Keita contends the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction for the unlawful removal of baggage from the Atlanta airport, *770 OCGA § 16-12-124. We conclude that, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of…”

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.