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 witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of such matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may, but need not, consist of the witness’s own testimony. The provisions of this Code section are subject to Code Section 24-7-703 and shall not apply to party admissions.
History
Code 1981, § 24-6-602, enacted by Ga. L. 2011, p. 99, § 2/HB 24.
Annotations
Cross references. Need for personal knowledge, Fed. R. Evid. 602.
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Lay testimony on why defendant’s charges upgraded. - To the extent the trial court concluded that the investigator’s testimony was proper lay testimony because it was based on personal knowledge about why the defendant’s charges were upgraded, the Georgia Supreme Court saw no abuse of discretion in the trial court denying the defendant’s motion for mistrial on that basis. Taylor v. State, 315 Ga. 630, 884 S.E.2d 346, 2023 Ga. LEXIS 42 (2023).
Personal recollection. - Because the fellow inmate was an eyewitness to the events depicted in the surveillance video, the fellow inmate’s testimony identifying the defendants from the still images from the surveillance video was admissible because the fellow inmate was testifying based on the fellow inmate’s recollection of the stabbing, not providing the fellow inmate’s opinion. Draughn v. State, 311 Ga. 378, 858 S.E.2d 8, 2021 Ga. LEXIS 193 (2021).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
22
cases (
15 in the last 5 years), 2014–2025 · leading case:
Kirby v. State, 819 S.E.2d 468 (Ga. 2018).
Kirby v. State, 819 S.E.2d 468 (Ga. 2018).
· cites it 6× “OCGA § 24-8-801 (c) defines hearsay as "a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.”
Harris v. State, 314 Ga. 238 (Ga. 2022).
· cites it 4× “See OCGA § 24-6-602 (“A witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the 130 witness has personal knowledge of such matter.”
Draughn v. The State (three Cases), 858 S.E.2d 8 (Ga. 2021).
· cites it 4× “” OCGA § 24-6-602 (“Rule 602”). We have previously concluded that the pertinent language of Rule 602 tracks that of Federal Rule of Evidence 602, meaning that we “look 7 Levatte appears to be making an argument that Tannahill’s identification of him is opinion testimony.”
Taylor v. State, 884 S.E.2d 346 (Ga. 2023).
· cites it 4× “378, 385 27 (858 SE2d 8) (2021) (quoting OCGA § 24-6-602 (“Rule 602”)) (holding that eyewitness testimony identifying the defendants in a surveillance video was based on personal knowledge because the witness identified the defendants based on his “recollection of the stabbing”).”
Smith v. The State (three Cases), 307 Ga. 106 (Ga. 2019).
· cites it 4× “See OCGA § 24-6-602 (“A witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of such matter.”
Sconyers v. State, 901 S.E.2d 170 (Ga. 2024).
· cites it 4× “First, he contends that her testimony was not based on personal knowledge and therefore was not admissible under OCGA § 24-6-602 (“Rule 602”). Second, he contends that her testimony did not establish a specific instance of Finch’s conduct showing that she was biased in favor of…”
Parker v. State, 769 S.E.2d 329 (Ga. 2015).
· cites it 2× “*596 See also OCGA § 24-6-602 (to be competent to testify to a matter, a lay witness must have “personal knowledge of the matter”).”
Cooper v. State, 895 S.E.2d 285 (Ga. 2023).
· cites it 4× “See OCGA § 24-6-602; see also Draughn v. State, 311 Ga.”
Rogers v. State, 859 S.E.2d 92 (Ga. 2021).
· cites it 4× “3 Specifically, Rogers contends that Agent Dyal’s statement referred to facts outside his personal knowledge, in violation of OCGA § 24-6-602; invaded the province of the jury concerning witness credibility, in violation of OCGA § 24-6-620; and was improper layperson opinion…”
Ford v. State, 903 S.E.2d 1 (Ga. 2024).
· cites it 4× “See OCGA § 24-6-602 (a witness’s own testimony may prove that she has personal knowledge of the matter at issue); see also Brown v.”
Sims v. State, 321 Ga. 627 (Ga. 2025).
· cites it 4× “Under OCGA § 24-6-602, a witness generally cannot testify about a matter “unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge” of the matter.”
Walker v. State, 843 S.E.2d 561 (Ga. 2020).
· cites it 2× “In any event, it was within the trial court’s discretion to prevent Appellant from asking Corporal Banville questions that Appellant had not shown that Corporal Banville could answer based on his personal knowledge.”
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.