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

O.C.G.A. § 16-9-40 (2019)

Venue determinations

✓ 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) In any prosecution for a violation of this article, the state is not required to establish that all of the acts constituting the crime occurred in this state or within one city, county, or local jurisdiction, and it is no defense that some of the acts constituting the crime did not occur in this state or within one city, county, or local jurisdiction. Except as otherwise provided by Code Section 17-2-2, for purposes of venue, the crime defined by this Code section shall be considered as having been committed in the county where the commission of the crime commenced.

FORGERY & FRAUDULENT PRACTICES

(b) In any prosecution for a violation of this article by a public official or government employee, using government funds or a financial transaction card issued to such official or government employee by or on behalf of government, the crime shall be considered to have been committed in the county in which such public official holds office or such government employee is employed.

History

(Code 1981, § 16-9-40, enacted by Ga. L. 2015, p. 266, § 4/HB 192.)

Annotations

Cross references. - Fraudulent practices pertaining to voter registration and elections, § 21-2-560 et seq. Insurance

fraud, § 33-1-9. Fraud in obtaining public assistance, food stamps, or Medicaid, § 49-4-15.

RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. - Criminal liability for theft of, interference with, or unauthorized use of, computer programs, files, or systems, 51 A.L.R.4th 971.

Offense of obtaining telephone services by unauthorized use of another’s telephone number - state cases, 61 A.L.R.4th 1197.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2024–2026 · leading case: Oluwole Olushola v. State (Ga. Ct. App. 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Oluwole Olushola v. State (Ga. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 4× “15 13 See OCGA § 16-9-40 (a) (stating that “the crime .”
Gines v. The State (three Cases) (Ga. 2026). · cites it 2× “See OCGA §§ 16-9-40(a) (establishing venue in prosecutions for financial transaction card fraud under OCGA § 16-9-33, among other statutory offenses); 16-9-125 (establishing venue in prosecutions for identity fraud under OCGA § 16-9-121, among other statutory offenses).”
Gines v. The State (three Cases) (Ga. 2026). · cites it 2× “See OCGA §§ 16-9-40(a) (establishing venue in prosecutions for financial transaction card fraud under OCGA § 16-9-33, among other statutory offenses); 16-9-125 (establishing venue in prosecutions for identity fraud under OCGA § 16-9-121, among other statutory offenses).”
— 16-9-40(a) — 2 cases
Gines v. The State (three Cases) (Ga. 2026). “See OCGA §§ 16-9-40(a) (establishing venue in prosecutions for financial transaction card fraud under OCGA § 16-9-33, among other statutory offenses); 16-9-125 (establishing venue in prosecutions for identity fraud under OCGA § 16-9-121, among other statutory offenses).”
Gines v. The State (three Cases) (Ga. 2026). “See OCGA §§ 16-9-40(a) (establishing venue in prosecutions for financial transaction card fraud under OCGA § 16-9-33, among other statutory offenses); 16-9-125 (establishing venue in prosecutions for identity fraud under OCGA § 16-9-121, among other statutory offenses).”
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.