Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 17-20-3 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 17-20-3 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 17-20-3

TITLE 17 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Section 20. Identification Procedures for Live Lineups, Photo Lineups, and Showups, 17-20-1 through 17-20-3.

ARTICLE 2 MISDEMEANOR CASES

17-20-3. Effect of failure to comply with requirements of this chapter.

The court may consider the failure to comply with the requirements of this chapter with respect to any challenge to an identification; provided, however, that such failure shall not mandate the exclusion of identification evidence.

(Code 1981, §17-20-3, enacted by Ga. L. 2015, p. 1046, § 4/SB 94.)

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

- Criminal defendant's age or height as factor in determination of whether circumstances of witness's identification of defendant in photographic array shown by police to witness were impermissibly suggestive as matter of federal constitutional law, 102 A.L.R.6th 365.

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 17-20-3

Total Results: 8  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Harris v. State, 872 S.E.2d 732 (Ga. 2022).

Cited 10 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | May 3, 2022 | 313 Ga. 653

Copy

Roseboro v. State, 841 S.E.2d 706 (Ga. 2020).

Cited 10 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Apr 6, 2020 | 308 Ga. 428

...impermissibly suggestive. However, even assuming that OCGA § 17-20-2 applies here and that the prosecutor failed to comply with it, noncompliance with the statute would not result in the automatic exclusion of Ellison’s identification. See OCGA § 17-20-3 (“The court may consider the failure to comply with the requirements of this chapter with respect to any challenge to an identification; provided however, that such failure shall not mandate the exclusion of identification evidence.”) (emphasis supplied)....
Copy

Curry v. State, 823 S.E.2d 758 (Ga. 2019).

Cited 9 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Feb 4, 2019 | 305 Ga. 73

...Additional facts relevant to this issue will be discussed in Division 2, infra. We note that the Georgia General Assembly has prioritized improving the accuracy of eyewitness identifications. To that end, the General Assembly adopted a new chapter in the Criminal Procedure Code, OCGA §§ 17-20-1 through 17-20-3, effective July 1, 2016, which requires any law enforcement agency that conducts live lineups, photo lineups, or showups for the purpose of determining whether a witness identifies someone as the perpetrator of an alleged crime to adopt written policies for using such procedures....
Copy

Anderson v. State, 869 S.E.2d 401 (Ga. 2022).

Cited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Feb 15, 2022 | 313 Ga. 178

...We reiterate, however, that “failure to follow the procedures contained within the statute does not require automatic exclusion[,]” but is instead a factor the court should consider when an identification is challenged. Kirkland v. State, 310 Ga. 738, 741-742 (2) (a) (854 SE2d 508) (2021); see also OCGA § 17-20-3. 23 a surgical mask....
Copy

Kirkland v. State, 854 S.E.2d 508 (Ga. 2021).

Cited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Feb 1, 2021 | 310 Ga. 738

...To the contrary, statutory law contemplates photo lineups being administered by police officers who know the identity of a suspect, see OCGA § 17- 20-2 (b) (2) (B).4 And, even in those situations, failure to follow the procedures contained within the statute does not require automatic exclusion. See OCGA § 17-20-3 (“The court may consider the failure 4 This statute provides that it is appropriate for a photo lineup to be administered by an individual [w]ho knows the identity of the suspect [and uses] a procedure in which photogr...
Copy

Mitchell v. State, 911 S.E.2d 607 (Ga. 2025).

Cited 4 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jan 28, 2025 | 320 Ga. 673

Copy

Eleby v. State, 903 S.E.2d 64 (Ga. 2024).

Cited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 11, 2024 | 319 Ga. 234

...619, 622 (864 SE2d 34) (2021) (explaining that “in the absence of a timely objection, there is no appellate review of evidentiary rulings under the old Evidence Code” (cleaned up)). 5 We note that, with the adoption of OCGA §§ 17-20-1 through 17-20-3, “the Georgia General Assembly has prioritized improving the accuracy of eyewitness identifications.” Curry v....

Curry v. State (Ga. 2019).

Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Feb 4, 2019 | 319 Ga. 234

...on 3 We note that the Georgia General Assembly has prioritized improving the accuracy of eyewitness identifications. To that end, the General Assembly adopted a new chapter in the Criminal Procedure Code, OCGA §§ 17-20-1 through 17-20-3, effective July 1, 2016, which requires any law enforcement agency that conducts live lineups, photo lineups, or showups for the purpose of determining whether a witness identifies someone as the perpetrator of an alleged crime to adopt written policies for using such procedures....