O.C.G.A.
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.
(a) In a criminal proceeding in which the accused is accused of conducting or participating in criminal gang activity in violation of Code Section 16-15-4, evidence of the accused’s commission of criminal gang activity, as such term is defined in Code Section 16-15-3, shall be admissible and may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant. (b) In a proceeding in which the prosecution intends to offer evidence under this Code section, the prosecutor shall disclose such evidence to the accused, including statements of witnesses or a summary of the substance of any testimony that is expected to be offered, at least ten days in advance of trial, unless the time is shortened or lengthened or pretrial notice is excused by the judge upon good cause shown. (c) This Code section shall not be the exclusive means to admit or consider evidence described in this Code section.
History
Code 1981, § 24-4-418, enacted by Ga. L. 2016, p. 811, § 6/HB 874.
Annotations
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Improper definition of criminal gang activity. - Trial court’s pre-trial ruling pursuant to O.C.G.A. §§ 16-15-4 and 24-4-418 (Rule 418), excluding two alleged prior acts of criminal gang activity committed by the defendant, was reversed because the trial court’s order confused the definition of criminal gang activity and the elements of proof of the crime of participation in criminal street gang ac-
tivity, thus, improperly requiring the state to prove elements under O.C.G.A. § 1615-4, even though that was not the standard. State v. McKinney, 366 Ga. App. 251, 881 S.E.2d 699, 2022 Ga. App. LEXIS 545 (2022). No abuse of discretion in admitting evidence of alleged gang membership. - Trial court did not abuse the court’s discretion by admitting evidence of
the defendant’s alleged membership in a gang because the evidence of gang membership was relevant to and probative of motive based on two witnesses testifying as to the defendant’s gang affiliation. Anglin v. State, 302 Ga. 333, 806 S.E.2d 573, 2017 Ga. LEXIS 890 (2017). Bifurcation of trial was not necessary. - Bifurcation was not necessary since evidence of the defendant’s gang affiliation would have been admissible in
a separate trial for murder and for the charged offenses other than violations of the Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act, O.C.G.A. § 16-15-1 et seq., as there was no requirement that the state charge a defendant with violating the prohibition of participation in criminal street gang activity in order to admit otherwise relevant evidence of gang activity. Bullard v. State, 307 Ga. 482, 837 S.E.2d 348, 2019 Ga. LEXIS 843 (2019).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
20
cases (
15 in the last 5 years), 2017–2026 · leading case:
Anglin v. State, 806 S.E.2d 573 (Ga. 2017).
Anglin v. State, 806 S.E.2d 573 (Ga. 2017).
· cites it 4× “OCGA § 24-4-418 provides for the admission of “evidence of the accused’s commission of criminal gang activity” where the defendant is charged under OCGA § 16-15-4, which is not at issue here.”
Ruthenberg v. State, 892 S.E.2d 728 (Ga. 2023).
· cites it 12× “Appellant contends that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of his three prior misdemeanor convictions for simple battery under OCGA § 24-4-418, because the State presented no evidence that he was in a gang when he committed the prior crimes or that he committed them to…”
McKinney v. State, 899 S.E.2d 121 (Ga. 2024).
· cites it 24× “We granted defendant Jerrion McKinney’s petition for certiorari to consider the proper construction of an evidence rule, OCGA § 24-4-418 (“Rule 418”), that in prosecutions under the Georgia Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act (OCGA § 16-15- 1 et seq.”
Drennon v. State, 880 S.E.2d 139 (Ga. 2022).
· cites it 4× “See also OCGA § 24-4-418 (a), which was enacted in 2016 and which says that “[i]n a criminal proceeding in which the accused is accused of conducting or participating in criminal gang activity in violation of Code Section 16-15-4, evidence of the accused’s commission of criminal…”
Rooks v. The State (two Cases), 317 Ga. 743 (Ga. 2023).
· cites it 4× “Boone Boulevard and charged with marijuana- and firearm-related offenses after investigators found 15 In its order denying Clark’s motion for new trial, the trial court concluded that the evidence of the October 28 incident was admissible as intrinsic evidence and because it…”
Davis v. State, 801 S.E.2d 897 (Ga. 2017).
· cites it 2× “See also OCGA § 24-4-418 (c) (admissibility of criminal gang activity; “[t]his Code section shall not be the exclusive means to admit or consider evidence described in this Code section”).”
Overstreet v. State, 864 S.E.2d 14 (Ga. 2021).
· cites it 4× “” 9 OCGA § 24-4-418 (a) provides that [i]n a criminal proceeding in which the accused is accused of conducting or participating in criminal gang activity in violation of Code Section 16-15-4, evidence of the accused’s commission of criminal gang activity, as such term is defined…”
Bullard v. State, 307 Ga. 482 (Ga. 2019).
· cites it 2× “See also OCGA § 24-4-418 (c). In that regard, evidence regarding the defendant’s gang affiliation is relevant and admissible when it is “intrinsic” to the crimes charged.”
Mills v. State, 910 S.E.2d 143 (Ga. 2024).
· cites it 4× “4 The State additionally argues, for the first time on appeal, that the evidence involving Williams is also admissible under OCGA § 24-4-418 (a), which provides that “[i]n a criminal proceeding in which the accused is accused of conducting or participating in criminal gang…”
State v. Jerrion McKinney (Ga. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 10× “3 Following a hearing, the trial court granted the State’s request to introduce the third incident, but denied its request to introduce the first two incidents, finding as follows: The central dispute is whether the State must prove the prior acts were related to gang activity…”
Upshaw v. The State (three Cases) (Ga. 2026).
· cites it 8× “Homer alone was indicted for two additional counts of violating the Gang Act (Counts 4, 8), two additional counts of felony murder (Counts 13–14), possession of a firearm by a convicted felon (Count 23), On appeal, all three defendants contend that the trial court erred by…”
In the Interest of Q.R., a Child (Ga. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 6× “In this juvenile delinquency case, the State filed a motion to admit gang-related evidence at trial pursuant to OCGA § 24-4-418. The trial court issued an order denying the motion “as to the admission of the documents into evidence pre-trial solely under OCGA § 24-4-418,” but…”
— 24-4-418(a) — 1 case
Upshaw v. The State (three Cases) (Ga. 2026).
“Homer alone was indicted for two additional counts of violating the Gang Act (Counts 4, 8), two additional counts of felony murder (Counts 13–14), possession of a firearm by a convicted felon (Count 23), On appeal, all three defendants contend that the trial court erred by…”
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.