O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 16-5-71 (2019)

Tattooing

✓ 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 for any person to tattoo the body of any person under the age of 18, except that a physician or osteopath licensed under Chapter 34 of Title 43, or a technician acting under the direct supervision of such licensed physician or osteopath, and in compliance with Chapter 9 of Title 31 shall be authorized to mark or

color the skin of any person under the age of 18 by pricking in coloring matter or by producing scars for medical or cosmetic purposes. (b) Any person violating the provisions of subsection (a) of this Code section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

History

Code 1981, § 16-5-71, enacted by Ga. L. 1987, p. 443, § 1; Ga. L. 1994, p. 446, § 1.

Annotations

Cross references. - Body art studios, § 31-40-1 et seq.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Tattooing the body of minor. - Trial court did not abuse the court’s discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to sever the offenses of child molestation, O.C.G.A. § 16-6-4(a)(1), aggravated sexual battery, O.C.G.A. § 16-6-22.2(b), tattooing the body of a minor, O.C.G.A. § 16-5-71(a), and the defendant’s motion for new trial on that basis because all of the sex offenses were similar and showed the defendant’s common motive, plan, scheme, or

bent of mind to satisfy the defendant’s sexual desires, and the circumstances surrounding the tattooing offenses would have been admissible at the trial of the sex offenses to show the defendant’s lustful disposition and bent of mind; the case was not so complex as to impair the jury’s ability to distinguish the evidence and apply the law intelligently as to each offense. Boatright v. State, 308 Ga. App. 266, 707 S.E.2d 158 (2011).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Fingerprintable offense. - Tattooing a person under the age of 16 is an offense for which those charged with its

violation are to be fingerprinted. 1987 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 87-21.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 2011–2011 · leading case: Boatright v. State, 707 S.E.2d 158 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Boatright v. State, 707 S.E.2d 158 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “2 (b)), and two counts of tattooing the body of a minor (OCGA § 16-5-71 (a)). Boatright filed a motion for new trial, which the trial court denied.”

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.