Syfert Injury Law Firm
Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448
(Code 1981, §17-5-56, enacted by Ga. L. 2003, p. 247, § 3; Ga. L. 2008, p. 486, § 2/HB 1297; Ga. L. 2011, p. 264, § 1-3/SB 80.)
The 2011 amendment, effective May 11, 2011, in subsection (b), rewrote the second and third sentences, which read: "In a case that involves the prosecution of a serious violent felony as defined by Code Section 17-10-6.1, a violation of Code Section 16-6-5.1, or sodomy, statutory rape, child molestation, bestiality, incest, or sexual battery as those terms are defined in Chapter 6 of Title 16, the evidence that contains biological material, including, but not limited to, stains, fluids, or hair samples that relate to the identity of the perpetrator of the crime shall be maintained for ten years after judgment in the criminal case becomes final or ten years after May 27, 2003, whichever is later. Evidence in all other felony and misdemeanor cases may be purged."
- Ga. L. 2011, p. 264, § 1-1/SB 80, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: "This Act shall be known and may be cited as the 'Johnia Berry Act.'"
- For annual survey on criminal law, see 64 Mercer L. Rev. 83 (2012). For note on the 2003 enactment of this Code section, see 20 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 119 (2003).
- State did not violate O.C.G.A. § 17-5-56(a) by failing to preserve material evidence when, following a single-car accident involving the defendant's car, the state removed samples of biological evidence from the interior of the defendant's car and sold the defendant's car to a salvage wholesaler who then sold the car to a mechanic, who cleaned, repaired, repainted, and resold the vehicle. State v. Mussman, 289 Ga. 586, 713 S.E.2d 822 (2011).
State was not obligated under O.C.G.A. § 17-5-56(a) to preserve four vials of the defendant's blood that were drawn as reference samples for DNA analysis. Even assuming the defendant's motion challenging the admissibility of the defendant's statements put the state on notice that the defendant's level of intoxication was an issue in determining whether the statements to law enforcement officers were voluntary, it did not indicate that the defendant was claiming that intoxication made the defendant physically incapable of committing the crimes and, thus, the defendant could not have been the perpetrator. Clay v. State, 290 Ga. 822, 725 S.E.2d 260 (2012).
- Defendant did not show that the cigarette butts found in the dumpster were constitutionally material to the defendant's defense because although the butts were potentially useful to the defense the defendant raised in the custodial statement and at trial, that another person committed the crimes, that did not establish that the butts had an obvious or readily perceived exculpatory value, and the court's conclusion that the cigarette butts had apparent exculpatory value to that defense was not supported by the record because the DNA testing could have been exculpatory or inculpatory. Therefore, the lost cigarette butts were not constitutionally material and the trial court erred in granting the defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment based on the failure to preserve the cigarette butts found in the dumpster in violation of O.C.G.A. § 17-5-56(a). State v. Mizell, 288 Ga. 474, 705 S.E.2d 154 (2010).
- When the defendant was convicted of rape, aggravated child molestation, and enticing a child for indecent purposes, because O.C.G.A. § 17-5-56 applies to physical evidence containing biological material that could identify the perpetrator and is collected at the time of the crime, the statute did not apply to the biological material collected at the victim's abortion more than two months after the crime occurred; and the statute did not apply to the sample collected from the victim's abortion because the sample was contaminated due to the storage procedure used by the medical clinic, not the state, and there was no usable biological material that would relate to the identity of the perpetrator. Davis v. State, 329 Ga. App. 797, 764 S.E.2d 588 (2014).
Cited in State v. Brown, 333 Ga. App. 643, 777 S.E.2d 27 (2015).
Admissibility and Reliability of Hair Sample Testing to Prove Illegal Drug Use, 47 POF3d 203.
Total Results: 6
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2015-06-29
Snippet: cells that contain DNA) is recognized in OCGA § 17-5-56 (requiring law enforcement agencies and prosecutors
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2015-06-29
Citation: 297 Ga. 567, 774 S.E.2d 90, 2015 Ga. LEXIS 545, 2015 WL 3935977
Snippet: cells that contain DNA) is recognized in OCGA § 17-5-56 (requiring law enforcement agencies and prosecutors
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2012-03-19
Citation: 725 S.E.2d 260, 290 Ga. 822, 2012 Fulton County D. Rep. 982, 2012 Ga. LEXIS 301
Snippet: notified Clay. A. Alleged Violation of OCGA § 17-5-56. Clay contends that the State was obligated to
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2011-06-13
Citation: 713 S.E.2d 822, 289 Ga. 586, 2011 Fulton County D. Rep. 1781, 2011 Ga. LEXIS 469
Snippet: and found that the State had violated OCGA § 17-5-56(a), which reads: Except as otherwise provided in
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2011-01-24
Citation: 705 S.E.2d 154, 288 Ga. 474
Snippet: that must be preserved in accordance with OCGA § 17-5-56."[1] In June 2004, Mizell filed a particularized
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2010-09-20
Citation: 699 S.E.2d 316, 287 Ga. 748, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 3051, 2010 Ga. LEXIS 598
Snippet: Except as provided in Code Sections 17-5-55 and 17-5-56 and subsections (d), (e), and (f) of this Code