O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 16-9-91 (2019)

Legislative findings

✓ 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

The General Assembly finds that:

(1) Computer related crime is a growing problem in the government and in the private sector;

(2) Such crime occurs at great cost to the public, since losses for each incident of computer crime tend to be far greater than the losses associated with each incident of other white collar crime;

(3) The opportunities for computer related crimes in state programs, and in other entities which operate within the state, through the introduction of fraudulent records into a computer system, unauthorized use of computer facilities, alteration or destruction of computerized information files, and stealing of financial instruments, data, or other assets are great;

(4) Computer related crime operations have a direct effect on state commerce;

(5) Liability for computer crimes should be imposed on all persons, as that term is defined in this title; and

(6) The prosecution of persons engaged in computer related crime is difficult under previously existing Georgia criminal statutes.

History

(Code 1981, § 16-9-91, enacted by Ga. L. 1991, p. 1045, § 1.)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2021 · leading case: Kinslow v. State, 860 S.E.2d 444 (Ga. 2021).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kinslow v. State, 860 S.E.2d 444 (Ga. 2021). · cites it 4× “9 OCGA § 16-9-91 provides the following as the legislative intent behind creating the computer crimes involved in this case: The General Assembly finds that: (1) Computer related crime is a growing problem in the government and in the private sector; (2) Such crime occurs at…”

SCQuARE Int'l, Ltd. v. BBDO Atlanta, Inc., 455 F. Supp. 2d 1347 (N.D. Ga. 2006). · cites it 2× “” O.C.G.A. § 16-9-91. To that end, the Act enumerates and defines a number of computer-related crimes, such as computer theft, computer trespass, computer invasion of privacy, and computer forgery.”

Firster v. Athens Heart Ctr., P.C., 305 F. Supp. 3d 1368 (M.D. Ga. 2017). · cites it 2× “and the Georgia Computer Systems Protection Act, O.C.G.A. § 16-9-91 et seq. Pending before the Court are the Center's motion for summary judgment and Firster's motion for partial summary judgment.”

Briggs v. State, 704 A.2d 904 (Md. 1998). “1997); Ga Code Ann. §§ 16-9-91 to 94 (1996 & Supp.”

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.