Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17 are included in the annotations for this Code section.

Records obtained from Georgia Crime Information Center.

- Former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17 provided for self-authentication when the document sought to be admitted was obtained from a computer terminal lawfully connected to the Georgia Crime Information Center. Thomas v. State, 196 Ga. App. 88, 395 S.E.2d 615 (1990) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17).

There was an inadequate foundation for the introduction of an uncertified driver's record since the prosecutor merely represented in argument that the record was from a computer connected to the Georgia Crime Information Center, but no witness testified that it was so obtained. Waters v. State, 210 Ga. App. 305, 436 S.E.2d 44 (1993) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17); Tipton v. State, 213 Ga. App. 764, 445 S.E.2d 860 (1994);(decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17).

An uncertified copy of defendant's driving record was properly introduced in evidence since the state adduced a sworn witness to identify the printout as a report from the Georgia Crime Information Center. Jackson v. State, 228 Ga. App. 877, 492 S.E.2d 897 (1997) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17).

In a prosecution for possession of vehicles with an altered vehicle identification number (VIN), the trial court properly permitted the introduction into evidence of four computer printouts that listed the make, model, VIN, and owner of four of the cars that allegedly had altered VINs where the printouts came from the Georgia Crime Information Center (GCIC) computer and the state laid a proper foundation when a certified GCIC operator testified that the computer printouts were obtained from a GCIC terminal. Brennan v. State, 247 Ga. App. 515, 544 S.E.2d 210 (2001) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17).

In a case where defendant, who had been convicted of driving with a suspended license, claimed that the state had not laid a proper legal foundation for the admission of the defendant's driving record, there was no error in the driving record's admission as there was at least circumstantial evidence that the driving record was connected to the Georgia crime information computer. Worthy v. State, 252 Ga. App. 852, 557 S.E.2d 448 (2001) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17).

Defendant's challenge to the admission of a Georgia Crime Information Center (GCIC) report was rejected as the state complied with the requirements of former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17 and the caselaw; the evidence was sufficient to show identity for purposes of the admission of the GCIC report as the GCIC record bore defendant's name, and defendant did not deny that it was defendant's. Evans v. State, 267 Ga. App. 706, 600 S.E.2d 671 (2004) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17).

Record from Georgia Department of Public Safety.

- Driving with a suspended license conviction was affirmed after the state proved that defendant received notice of defendant's license suspension by introducing defendant's driving record; an officer testified that the officer was certified to run driving histories and that the officer obtained a printout of defendant's driving history from an approved computer terminal at the Georgia Department of Public Safety. Fannin v. State, 267 Ga. App. 413, 599 S.E.2d 355 (2004) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17).

Certified copy of driver's license.

- Because a defendant's driver's license was a properly certified public record, the trial court was permitted to infer the reliability of any hearsay contained therein and to conclude that no confrontation clause violation had been shown pursuant to former O.C.G.A. §§ 24-3-17 and24-7-20 (see now O.C.G.A. §§ 24-9-902 and24-9-924). Douglas v. State, 312 Ga. App. 585, 718 S.E.2d 908 (2011), cert. denied, No. S12C0470, 2012 Ga. LEXIS 606 (Ga. 2012) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17).

National Crime Information Center printout of defendant's criminal record was competent, admissible evidence that defendant had three prior shoplifting convictions, one in Georgia and two in Arizona. State v. Sterling, 244 Ga. App. 328, 535 S.E.2d 329 (2000) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17).

Printout establishing date of license suspension properly admitted.

- When the defendant was charged with driving with a suspended license, a certified copy of the defendant's notice of suspension prepared in connection with an earlier driving-under-the-influence conviction and a computer printout establishing the date of the suspension were properly admitted under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17. Before the printout was submitted to the jury, the trial court required that the prejudicial information on the printout be redacted. Hann v. State, 292 Ga. App. 719, 665 S.E.2d 731 (2008) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17).

Insufficient foundation for admission of evidence.

- Testimony of an employee of the county solicitor's (now district attorney) office that the employee had obtained a copy of defendant's driving record from the state patrol office was not sufficient foundation for admission of the record. Tolbert v. State, 227 Ga. App. 647, 490 S.E.2d 183 (1997) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-17).

Ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to officer's hearsay testimony.

- Appellate court reversed the trial court's denial of the defendant's motion for a new trial with respect to the two misdemeanor traffic violations because the prejudice from trial counsel's failure to object was clear since the officer's hearsay testimony was the only evidence offered to prove the elements of the traffic offenses and had the evidence been excluded, there would not have been sufficient evidence to convict on those offenses. Taylor v. State, 337 Ga. App. 486, 788 S.E.2d 97 (2016).