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

O.C.G.A. § 40-14-6 (2019)

Warning signs required; signage requirements

✓ 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) Each county, municipality, college, and university using speed detection devices shall erect signs on every highway which comprises a part of the state highway system at that point on the highway which intersects the corporate limits of the municipality, the county boundary, or the boundary of the college or university campus. Such signs shall be at least 24 by 30 inches in area and shall warn approaching motorists that speed detection devices are being employed. No such devices shall be used within 500 feet of any such warning sign erected pursuant to this subsection. (b) In addition to the signs required under subsection (a) of this Code section, each county, municipality, college, and university using speed detection devices shall erect speed limit warning signs on every highway which comprises a part of the state highway system at that point on the highway which intersects the corporate limits of the municipality, the county boundary, or the boundary of the college or university campus. Such signs shall be at least 24 by 30 inches in area, shall warn approaching motorists of changes in the speed limit, shall be visible plainly from every lane of traffic, shall be viewable in any traffic conditions, and shall not be placed in such a manner that the view of such sign is subject to being obstructed by any other vehicle on such highway. No such devices shall be used within 500 feet of any such warning sign erected pursuant to this subsection. (c) In addition to the signs required under subsections (a) and (b) of this Code section, each law enforcement agency using an automated traffic enforcement safety device as provided for in Code Section 40-14-18 shall erect signs warning of the use of a stationary speed detection device within the approaching school zone. Such signs shall be at least 24 by 30 inches in area, shall be visible plainly from every lane of traffic, shall be viewable in all traffic conditions, and shall not be placed in such a manner that the view of such sign is subject to being obstructed by any other vehicle on such highway. Such signs shall be placed within 500 feet prior to the warning sign announcing the reduction of the speed limit for the school speed zone. There shall be a rebuttable presumption that such signs are properly installed pursuant to this subsection at the time of any alleged violation under this article.

History

(Ga. L. 1968, p. 425, § 5; Ga. L. 1970, p. 435, § 4; Ga. L. 1989, p. 586, § 1; Ga. L. 1996, p. 1281, § 9; Ga. L. 2003, p. 450, § 5; Ga. L. 2018, p. 1057, § 5/HB 978.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Incomplete compliance. - Although there is evidence that some sites on the city limits of the municipality should have had signs but did not, since there is also evidence that other locations contained signs comporting with the statute, incomplete compliance with O.C.G.A. § 40-14-6 does not require exclusion of evidence gathered by use of a speed detection device. Ferguson v. State, 163 Ga. App. 171, 292 S.E.2d 87 (1982). Evidence of speeding was admissible even though the city was not in total literal compliance with the requirements of O.C.G.A. § 40-14-6 that signs be erected on every highway at the point on the highway which intersects the corporate limits of the city. Royston v. State, 166 Ga. App. 386, 304 S.E.2d 732 (1983). When a defendant convicted of speeding claimed there was no evidence that the public was put on notice that speed detection devices were in use near the location where the defendant was stopped, under O.C.G.A. § 40-14-6(a), incomplete compliance with this provision, requiring the posting of warnings that speed detection devices were in use, did not require the exclusion of evidence obtained by the use of speed detection devices. Ferguson v. State, 263 Ga. App. 40, 587 S.E.2d 195 (2003). Despite the defendant’s claim that the state failed to comply with O.C.G.A.

§ 40-14-6, the officer’s testimony that the defendant had been speeding was admissible because the officer testified that the officer verified the existence and extent of a 35 mph speed limit zone at the county line by riding on both sides of that line and physically verifying the posted speed limits in the area. Frasard v. State, 322 Ga. App. 468, 745 S.E.2d 716 (2013). Placement of detection device. - O.C.G.A. § 40-14-6 requires that a speed detection device itself be more than 500 feet from the county or municipal boundary, but does not forbid the penetration of a radar beam into the 500-foot zone. State v. Vickery, 184 Ga. App. 468, 361 S.E.2d 678, cert. denied, 184 Ga. App. 910, 361 S.E.2d 678 (1987). Applicability to state law enforcement officers. - O.C.G.A. § 40-14-6 is not applicable to state law enforcement officers and therefore although the radar was not operated within 500 feet of a radar speed device warning sign, such failure would not invalidate the radar evidence. Walker v. State, 204 Ga. App. 559, 420 S.E.2d 17, cert. denied, 204 Ga. App. 922, 420 S.E.2d 17 (1992). Because a trooper was employed by the state, and not a county, municipality, college, or university, the limitations under O.C.G.A. § 40-14-6 did not apply. Wilshin v. State, 289 Ga. App. 683, 658 S.E.2d 224 (2008).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 7A Am. Jur. 2d, Automobiles and Highway Traffic, § 271. C.J.S. - 60 C.J.S., Motor Vehicles,

§§ 28 et seq., 68 et seq. 61A C.J.S., Motor Vehicles, § 1641 et seq.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1983–2013 · leading case: Walker v. State, 420 S.E.2d 17 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Walker v. State, 420 S.E.2d 17 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 6× “He argues that OCGA § 40-14-6 applies to state law enforcement agencies as well as county and municipal law enforcement agencies.”
Ferguson v. State, 587 S.E.2d 195 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 40-14-6 (a) provides: Each county, municipality, college, and university using speed detection devices shall erect signs on every highway which comprises a part of the state highway system at that point on the highway which intersects the corporate limits of the…”
Royston v. State, 304 S.E.2d 732 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 4× “On appeal, she attacks her conviction by asserting that the evidence of her speeding was inadmissible because the City of Athens was not in total literal compliance with the following requirements of OCGA § 40-14-6 (Code Ann. § 68-2105): “Each county and municipality using speed…”
Wilshin v. State, 658 S.E.2d 224 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 8× “Wilshin also argues that the trial court erred in failing to dismiss the case, as the traffic stop was made within 500 feet of a county line in violation of OCGA § 40-14-6. Finding these allegations of error to be without merit, we affirm.”
Frasard v. State, 745 S.E.2d 716 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “*470 (b) OCGA § 40-14-6 (a) provides: Each county, municipality, college, and university using speed detection devices shall erect signs on every highway which comprises a part of the state highway system at that point on the highway which intersects the corporate limits of the…”
Hennings v. State, 512 S.E.2d 357 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “468 ( 361 SE2d 678 ) (1987) dealt with interpretation of “used” in OCGA § 40-14-6 and is not in issue here. Additionally, this Court stated there that we were unwilling to say that failure to properly erect radar warning signs required exclusion of evidence gathered by use of…”
Hardaway v. State, 427 S.E.2d 527 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “Read, but it fails to indicate his capacity with the manufacturer or whether he possesses the requisite certification from the Georgia Department of Public Safety.”
Finlon v. State, 491 S.E.2d 458 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “We reject Finlon’s contention that the speeding charge must be reversed because the State failed to establish that (1) he received notice of his right to have the radar device’s accuracy tested; (2) signs warning of the use of speed detection devices were posted, OCGA § 40-14-6;…”
State v. Vickery, 361 S.E.2d 678 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 8× “Appellee sought to suppress the intoximeter results on the ground that the officer’s use of radar within 500 feet of the radar warning sign erected pursuant to OCGA § 40-14-6 violated the statute. The trial court reluctantly suppressed both the radar and intoximeter readings,…”
Carver v. State, 406 S.E.2d 236 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “OCGA §§ 40-14-6; 40-14-9. Accordingly, as the prosecution satisfied the existing statutory elements for admissibility of the state patrolman’s testimony concerning the radar results, this testimony was properly admitted and was sufficient to authorize Carver’s conviction for…”
Michael C. Frasard v. State (Ga. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “(b) OCGA § 40-14-6 (b) provides: Each county, municipality, college, and university using speed detection devices shall erect signs on every highway which comprises a part of the state highway system at that point on the highway which intersects the corporate limits of the…”
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.