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

O.C.G.A. § 24-1-2 (2019)

Applicability of the rules of evidence

✓ 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) The rules of evidence shall apply in all trials by jury in any court in this state. (b) The rules of evidence shall apply generally to all nonjury trials and other fact-finding proceedings of any court in this state subject to the limitations set forth in subsections (c) and (d) of this Code section. (c) The rules of evidence, except those with respect to privileges, shall not apply in the following situations: (1) The determination of questions of fact preliminary to admissibility of evidence when the issue is to be determined by the court under Code Section 24-1-104; (2) Criminal proceedings before grand juries; (3) Proceedings for extradition or rendition; (4) Proceedings for revoking parole; (5) Proceedings for the issuance of warrants for arrest and search warrants except as provided by subsection (b) of Code Section 17-4-40; (6) Proceedings with respect to release on bond;

(7) Dispositional hearings and custody hearings in juvenile court; or (8) Contempt proceedings in which the court, pursuant to subsection (a) of Code Section 15-1-4, may act summarily. (d)(1) In criminal commitment or preliminary hearings in any court, the rules of evidence shall apply except that hearsay shall be admissible. (2) In in rem forfeiture proceedings, the rules of evidence shall apply except that hearsay shall be admissible in determining probable cause or reasonable cause. (3) In presentence hearings, the rules of evidence shall apply except that hearsay and character evidence shall be admissible. (4) In administrative hearings, the rules of evidence as applied in the trial of nonjury civil actions shall be followed, subject to special statutory rules or agency rules as authorized by law. (e) Except as modified by statute, the common law as expounded by Georgia courts shall continue to be applied to the admission and exclusion of evidence and to procedures at trial.

History

Code 1981, § 24-1-2, enacted by Ga. L. 2011, p. 99, § 2/HB 24.

Annotations

Cross references. Applicability of the rules, Fed. R. Evid. 1101.

Law reviews. For article on the 2011 enactment of this Code section, see 28 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 1 (2011). For annual survey of evidence law, see 67 Mercer L. Rev. 63 (2015).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Application of rules of evidence. - Under Georgia’s new Evidence Code, unless a fact-finding proceeding involves one of the 12 situations enumerated in O.C.G.A. § 24-1-2(c) and (d), the rules of evidence fully apply; similarity to one or more of the enumerated situations is insufficient to limit the applicability of the evidence rules. Parker v. State, 296 Ga. 586, 769 S.E.2d 329, 2015 Ga. LEXIS 133 (2015). Error in application of hearsay rules in determining material witness status. - Trial court erred in applying the hearsay rules to exclude the appellant’s proffered documents from the evidence the court considered in ruling on a motion for material witness certificates as to the Kentucky-based manufacturer of the breathalyzer because an exception un-

der O.C.G.A. § 24-1-2(c)(1) applied. Parker v. State, 296 Ga. 586, 769 S.E.2d 329, 2015 Ga. LEXIS 133 (2015). Long standing requirement for admission of victim’s character evidence not changed. - There is no reason to construe the rules regarding the admission of character evidence as a modification of Georgia’s long-standing requirement that a defendant must first make a prima facie showing of self-defense before requiring a trial court to determine whether evidence pertaining to the victim’s character is admissible. Oliver v. State, 329 Ga. App. 377, 765 S.E.2d 606, 2014 Ga. App. LEXIS 692 (2014). Admissibility of prior testimony of disabled witness. - Trial court did not err in relying in part on a letter from a physician treating a prior victim, who

wrote that the victim’s medical condition left the victim unable to travel to Chatham County, and in admitting the victim’s prior testimony about a robbery because, whether the Screven County victim was unavailable presented a question of fact to be determined by the trial court

as a preliminary to the admissibility of the victim’s prior testimony, and there was no error in its consideration of the physician’s letter in resolving that question. Scott v. State, 309 Ga. 95, 844 S.E.2d 785, 2020 Ga. LEXIS 445 (2020).

RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. Applicability of rules of evidence in juvenile delinquency proceeding, A.L.R.2d 1128.

Applicability of rules of evidence to juvenile transfer, waiver, or certification hearings, 37 A.L.R.5th 703.

ARTICLE 2 GENERAL EVIDENTIARY MATTERS

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 83 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: Parker v. State, 769 S.E.2d 329 (Ga. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Parker v. State, 769 S.E.2d 329 (Ga. 2015). · cites it 46× “1 As explained below, we hold that a proceeding on a motion for issuance of a material witness certificate is a fact-finding proceeding to which the new evidence rules apply under OCGA § 24-1-2 (b), unless an exception applies — but an exception does apply.”
Bruno’s Food Stores, Inc. v. Taylor, 491 S.E.2d 881 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 24× “The special concurrence disagrees and cites to OCGA §§ 24-1-2 and 24-4-9 in support thereof.”
State v. Chulpayev, 770 S.E.2d 808 (Ga. 2015). · cites it 6× “See OCGA § 24-1-2 (setting forth the proceedings in which all or portions of the new evidence rules apply); Parker v.”
Chrysler Grp. LLC v. Walden, 812 S.E.2d 244 (Ga. 2018). · cites it 3× “The new Evidence Code addresses old common law rules in OCGA § 24-1-2 (e), which provides that "[e]xcept as modified by statute, the common law as expounded by Georgia courts shall continue to be applied to the admission and exclusion of evidence and to procedures at trial.”
State v. Orr, 827 S.E.2d 892 (Ga. 2019). · cites it 2× “See also OCGA § 24-1-2 (e) (" Except as modified by statute , the common law as expounded by Georgia courts shall continue to be applied to the admission and exclusion of evidence and to procedures at trial.”
Ballard v. Meyers, 572 S.E.2d 572 (Ga. 2002). · cites it 8× “The relevance of the pleading did not involve a legal issue which required an expert opinion, and the drafter was not the sole indispensable witness as to whether their former recovery was for the same injuries which they now alleged that they sustained in the subsequent crash.”
Butts v. State, 389 S.E.2d 395 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 8× “OCGA § 24-1-2. The dissent, in essence, would assert that Williams and Brown are cases limited in application to the impeachment of a defendant's testimony.”
Georgia Osteopathic Hosp., Inc. v. O'Neal, 403 S.E.2d 235 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 4× “" See generally OCGA § 24-1-2. With these express reservations, I concur *782 fully with the majority and with the reversal of the judgment.”
State v. LEDBETTER (& Vice Versa), 899 S.E.2d 222 (Ga. 2024). · cites it 4× “See OCGA § 24-1-2 (c) (5) (explaining that generally “[t]he rules of evidence, except those with respect to privileges” do not apply in “[p]roceedings for the issuance of .”
Brannen v. Prince, 421 S.E.2d 76 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 4× “" OCGA § 24-1-2. In the case at bar, the expert witness admitted in open court that he was personally familiar with the medical journal in question and, in addition, that it was commonly read and referred to by professionals, as above discussed.”
Gregg v. State, 411 S.E.2d 65 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× ““The object of all legal investigation is the discovery of truth,” (OCGA § 24-1-2) and as long as sufficient evidence of indicia of reliability appears in the record either before or after the introduction of the child’s out-of-court statements, the fair trial rights of the…”
Brown v. State, 512 S.E.2d 260 (Ga. 1999). · cites it 4× “OCGA § 24-1-2. The jury in this case determined Brown's guilt totally oblivious to the reasons why Brown killed Clarkson.”
Show all 83 citing cases →
— 24-1-2(a) — 1 case
Chrysler Grp. LLC v. Walden, 812 S.E.2d 244 (Ga. 2018). “The new Evidence Code addresses old common law rules in OCGA § 24-1-2 (e), which provides that "[e]xcept as modified by statute, the common law as expounded by Georgia courts shall continue to be applied to the admission and exclusion of evidence and to procedures at trial.”
— 24-1-2(e) — 1 case
Joshua Taylor v. State (Ga. Ct. App. 2016).
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.