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

O.C.G.A. § 35-1-20 (2019)

Retention of weapons by officers following employment

✓ 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) As used in this Code section, the term:

(1) ‘‘Honorable conditions’’ means conditions of having satisfied, met, or exceeded the conduct and performance standards established by the state entity for sworn police officers.

(2) ‘‘State entity’’ means any state department, agency, board, bureau, office, commission, public corporation, system, or authority.

(b) The governing authority of each municipality and county in this state and each board of education which employs sworn police officers who are certified by the Georgia Peace Officer Standards and Training Council may adopt policies under which such sworn police officers, upon their retirement from employment by such municipality, county, or board of education or upon leaving such employment as a result of a disability arising in the line of duty, shall be entitled, as part of their compensation, to retain their weapon and badge.

(c) Except where otherwise provided for by law for a state entity, each state entity which employs sworn police officers who are certified by the Georgia Peace Officer Standards and Training Council shall adopt rules, regulations, or policies under which such sworn police officers, upon their retirement from employment by such state entity or upon leaving such employment as a result of a disability arising in the line of duty, shall be entitled, as part of their compensation, to retain their weapon and badge; provided, however, that such sworn police officers retire or leave under honorable conditions.

History

Code 1981, § 35-1-20, enacted by Ga. L. 2016, p. 823, § 1/SB 263; Ga. L. 2017, p. 24, § 2/SB 18. The 2017 amendment, effective July 1, 2017, added subsection (a); designated the previously existing provisions of this

Code section as subsection (b); in subsection (b), substituted ‘‘sworn police officers’’ for ‘‘sworn officers’’ in the middle, and substituted ‘‘their’’ for ‘‘his or her’’ twice near the end; and added subsection (c).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2002–2002 · leading case: In Re Infocure Sec. Litig., 210 F. Supp. 2d 1331 (N.D. Ga. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Infocure Sec. Litig., 210 F. Supp. 2d 1331 (N.D. Ga. 2002). · cites it 3× “§ 35-1-20(10)(a). The South Carolina Supreme Court, in Biales v.”
Hafner v. Infocure Corp., 210 F. Supp. 2d 1331 (N.D. Ga. 2002). “§ 35-1-20(2). The district court in CFT Seaside held that this definition does not cover professionals such as attorneys engaged in their traditional advisory functions.”
— 35-1-20(10)(a) — 1 case
In Re Infocure Sec. Litig., 210 F. Supp. 2d 1331 (N.D. Ga. 2002). “§ 35-1-20(10)(a). The South Carolina Supreme Court, in Biales v.”
— 35-1-20(13)(b) — 1 case
In Re Infocure Sec. Litig., 210 F. Supp. 2d 1331 (N.D. Ga. 2002). “§ 35-1-20(10)(a). The South Carolina Supreme Court, in Biales v.”
— 35-1-20(2) — 2 cases
In Re Infocure Sec. Litig., 210 F. Supp. 2d 1331 (N.D. Ga. 2002). “§ 35-1-20(10)(a). The South Carolina Supreme Court, in Biales v.”
Hafner v. Infocure Corp., 210 F. Supp. 2d 1331 (N.D. Ga. 2002). “§ 35-1-20(2). The district court in CFT Seaside held that this definition does not cover professionals such as attorneys engaged in their traditional advisory functions.”
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.