O.C.G.A. § 16-12-63 (2019)
Transfer of regulatory authority over bingo; procedure and regulation
(a) The Secretary of State shall succeed to all rules, regulations, policies, procedures, and pending and finalized administrative orders of the director of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation applicable to regulation of bingo games and recreational bingo under this part which are in effect on June 30, 2021. Such rules, regulations, policies, procedures, and orders shall remain in effect until amended, repealed, superseded, or nullified by the Secretary of State.
(b) All valid agreements, contracts, licenses, permits, certificates, and similar authorizations previously issued by the director of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation with respect to any function transferred to the Secretary of State under this part shall continue in effect until the same expire by their terms unless they are suspended, revoked, or otherwise made ineffective, as provided by law.
OFFENSES/HEALTH & MORALS
(c) Effective July 1, 2021, the Secretary of State shall carry out all of the functions and obligations and exercise all of the powers provided in this part which were formerly held by the director of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation. All records in possession of the director of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation which are exclusively used for the regulation of bingo games and recreational bingo under this part shall be transferred to the Secretary of State on July 1, 2021.
History
Code 1981, § 16-12-63, enacted by Ga. L. 2021, p. 394, § 10/HB 410.
ARTICLE 3 OBSCENITY AND RELATED OFFENSES
Annotations
Cross references. Power of counties and municipalities to enact ordinances which have effect of restricting adult bookstores and adult movie houses to areas zoned for commercial or industrial purposes, § 36-60-3. Use of telephone communications for obscene, threatening, or other purposes, § 46-5-21. Use of telephone to transmit obscene, lewd, or other communications for commercial purposes, § 46-5-22. Law reviews. For article discussing history of Georgia’s written obscenity statutes from the 1860’s to the late 1960’s, see 19 Mercer L. Rev. 287 (1968).
For comment discussing the constitutional standard for judging obscenity, in light of Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 93 S. Ct. 2607, 37 L. Ed. 2d 419 (1973), see 10 Ga. St. B.J. 327 (1973). For article discussing obscenity laws and their conflict with U.S. Const., Amend. 1, see 8 Ga. L. Rev. 291 (1974). For article, “Misdemeanor Sentencing in Georgia,” see 7 Ga. St. B.J. 8 (2001). For article, “Sex In and Out of Intimacy,” see 59 Emory L.J. 809 (2010). For article, “Evil Angel Eulogy: Reflections on the Passing of the Obscenity Defense in Copyright,” see 20 J. Intell. Prop. L. 209 (2013).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Definition of obscenity set forth in former Code 1933, § 26-2101 et seq. was applicable to all sections dealing with same question. Jenkins v. State, 230 Ga. 726, 199 S.E.2d 183, 1973 Ga. LEXIS 1046 (1973), rev’d, 418 U.S. 153, 94 S. Ct. 2750, 41 L. Ed. 2d 642, 1974 U.S. LEXIS 85 (1974) (see O.C.G.A. Art. 3, Ch. 12, T. 16). Possession of obscene material in privacy of home. - State’s power to regulate obscenity does not extend to mere possession in privacy of own home. Warshaw v. Eastman Kodak Co., 148 Ga.
App. 670, 252 S.E.2d 182, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 1602 (1979). Right to privately possess obscene materials does not presuppose corollary constitutional right of unregulated access. Warshaw v. Eastman Kodak Co., 148 Ga. App. 670, 252 S.E.2d 182, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 1602 (1979). It would be against public policy to return obscene material to owner. Warshaw v. Eastman Kodak Co., 148 Ga. App. 670, 252 S.E.2d 182, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 1602 (1979).
RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. Publications of a scientific, educational or instructive character regarding sex relations as within statutes relating to obscene or immoral publications, 76 A.L.R. 1099. Power of municipality in respect of inspection and censorship of motion-picture films, 126 A.L.R. 1363. Entrapment to commit offense against obscenity laws, 77 A.L.R.2d 792. Modern concept of obscenity, 5 A.L.R.3d 1158. Validity of procedures designed to protect the public against obscenity, 5 A.L.R.3d 1214; 93 A.L.R.3d 297. Exhibition of obscene motion pictures as nuisance, 50 A.L.R.3d 969.
What constitutes such discriminatory prosecution or enforcement of laws as to provide valid defense in state criminal proceedings, 95 A.L.R.3d 280. In personam or territorial jurisdiction of state court in connection with obscenity prosecution of author, actor, photographer, publisher, distributor, or other party whose acts were performed outside the state, 16 A.L.R.4th 1318. Processor’s right to refuse to process or return film or video tape of obscene subject, 18 A.L.R.4th 1326. Validity and application of statute exempting nonmanagerial, nonfinancially interested employees from obscenity prosecution, 35 A.L.R.4th 1237.
PART 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS Law reviews. For article, “Sex In and Out of Intimacy,” see 59 Emory L.J. 809 (2010).