O.C.G.A. § 24-13-135 (2019)
Admissibility and use of deposition
At the trial or upon any hearing, a part or all of a deposition, so far as otherwise admissible under the rules of evidence, may be used if the witness is unavailable. Any deposition may also be used by any party for the purpose of contradicting or impeaching the testimony of the deponent as a witness. If only a part of a deposition is offered in evidence by a party, an adverse party may require the offering of all of it which is relevant to the part offered, and any party may offer other parts. A witness is not unavailable if the exemption, refusal to testify, claim of lack of memory, inability, or absence of such witness is due to the procurement or wrongdoing of the party offering the deposition at the hearing or trial for the purpose of preventing the witness from attending or testifying.
History
Code 1981, § 24-13-135, enacted by Ga. L. 2011, p. 99, § 2/HB 24.
Annotations
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former O.C.G.A. § 24-10-135 are included in the annotations for this Code section. Prosecuting attorney’s agreement to cooperate with defense counsel in videotaping of a deposition did not constitute an agreement of stipulation that the deposition could be admitted at trial. Hullender v. State, 256 Ga. 86, 344 S.E.2d 207, 1986 Ga. LEXIS 693 (1986) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-10-135). Victim’s deposition at retrial. - Trial court did not abuse the court’s discretion in allowing a deposition of an
80-year-old victim, who had a brain tumor and a generalized anxiety disorder, to be offered in lieu of the victim’s testimony at defendant’s retrial because the trial court had overruled defendant’s former O.C.G.A. § 24-10-135 objection in defendant’s first trial and stood on the court’s earlier ruling in defendant’s retrial; while it would have been better to make an explicit finding of unavailability in the retrial, the finding was implicit in the trial court’s ruling and was authorized by the evidence. Austin v. State, 275 Ga. App. 560, 621 S.E.2d 546, 2005 Ga. App. LEXIS 1034 (2005) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-10-135).