O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 40-2-5 (2019)

Unlawful actions relating to license plate; use of expired prestige license plate

✓ 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) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, it shall be unlawful: (1) To remove or transfer a license plate from the motor vehicle for which such license plate was issued; (2) To sell or otherwise transfer or dispose of a license plate upon or for use on any motor vehicle other than the vehicle for which such license plate was issued; (3) To buy, receive, use, or possess for use on a motor vehicle any license plate not issued for use on such motor vehicle; or (4) To operate a motor vehicle bearing a license plate which was improperly removed or transferred from another vehicle. (b) Any person who shall knowingly violate any provision of subsection (a) of this Code section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than $500.00 or by confinement for not more than 12 months, or both. (c) It shall not be unlawful for any person to place an expired prestige license plate on the front of a motor vehicle provided that such vehicle also bears a current valid license plate on the rear of such vehicle.

History

Ga. L. 1918, p. 264, §§ 1, 2; Code 1933, § 68-9916; Ga. L. 1966, p. 10, § 1; Ga. L. 1990, p. 1657, § 2; Ga. L. 1990, p. 2048, § 2.

Annotations

Law reviews. For note on 1990 amendment of this Code section, see 7 Georgia St. U.L. Rev. 329 (1990).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Revalidation decal not covered by statute. - Although the revalidation decal found on the defendant’s vehicle had been stolen from another vehicle the prior

month, the offense of use of a license plate to conceal the identity of a vehicle in O.C.G.A. § 40-2-5 covered license plates but not revalidation decals; and there was

MOTOR VEHICLES & TRAFFIC

no evidence that the license plate on the defendant’s vehicle was removed or transferred from another vehicle, or that the defendant committed any other act addressed in the statute. Kea v. State, 344 Ga. App. 251, 810 S.E.2d 152, 2018 Ga. App. LEXIS 13 (2018). Traffic stop based on suspicion of license plate violation. - Trial court did not err in denying motions to supress filed by the two defendants because the officer: (1) had a reasonable and sufficient basis for initiating a traffic stop of the car the defendants were traveling in based on a belief that the license plate on the subject vehicle might have belonged on another car, and hence, was illegally transferred; and (2) did not improperly prolong the stop once the defendants told conflicting stories of the defendants’ travels and one declined to grant the officer consent to search. Andrews v. State, 289 Ga. App. 679, 658 S.E.2d 126, 2008 Ga. App. LEXIS 103 (2008), cert. denied, No. S08C0963, 2008 Ga. LEXIS 507 (Ga. June 2, 2008). Lesser included offenses. - Misdemeanor offense of affixing to a vehicle a license plate not authorized for use on that vehicle is not a lesser included offense of the felony of using a motor vehicle license plate upon a vehicle for which the plate was not issued. Dismuke

v. State, 142 Ga. App. 381, 236 S.E.2d 12, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 1624 (1977). Nondisclosure that vehicle was rebuilt. - When the certificate of title which defendant obtained for automobile did not disclose on the title’s face that the vehicle had been rebuilt, the jury was authorized to conclude that the defendant had knowingly concealed or misrepresented the identity thereof. Martin v. State, 160 Ga. App. 275, 287 S.E.2d 244, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 2971 (1981). Jury to decide tag issue. - Court of Appeals of Georgia rejected a defendant’s sufficiency of the evidence challenge as it was for the jury to accept or reject the defendant’s explanations as to whether the operation of a Mercury bearing a Ford tag was improper and knowing. Rylee v. State, 288 Ga. App. 784, 655 S.E.2d 239, 2007 Ga. App. LEXIS 1204 (2007). Rule of lenity did not apply. - Because the defendant was convicted and sentenced for a violation of No. S08C0963, O.C.G.A. § 40-2-5, and not of a violation of O.C.G.A. § 40-2-7, for the single and distinct offense of operating a motor vehicle bearing an improper tag, the Court of Appeals of Georgia had no occasion to apply the rule of lenity. Rylee v. State, 288 Ga. App. 784, 655 S.E.2d 239, 2007 Ga. App. LEXIS 1204 (2007).

RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. Civil rights and liabilities as affected by failure to comply with regulations as to

registration of automobile or motorcycle, or licensing of operator, 54 A.L.R. 374.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1987–2018 · leading case: KEA v. the STATE (Three Cases)., 810 S.E.2d 152 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

KEA v. the STATE (Three Cases)., 810 S.E.2d 152 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 12× “1 ), pandering ( OCGA § 16-6-12 ), and use of a license plate to conceal the identity of a vehicle ( OCGA § 40-2-5 ). He argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions and that the trial court should have granted him a new trial under the general grounds…”

Rogers v. State, 363 S.E.2d 846 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 8× “Appellant was convicted and sentenced on a four-count recidivist indictment for theft by taking of a 1985 Dodge Caravan on November 27, 1984 (OCGA § 16-8-2), driving without a license, concealing the identity of a motor vehicle by possessing and using a State of Alabama Dealer's…”

Rylee v. State, 655 S.E.2d 239 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 6× “(a) Rylee was convicted under OCGA § 40-2-5 (a) (3), which provides that it is illegal “[t]o buy, receive, use, or possess for use on a motor vehicle any license plate not issued for use on such motor vehicle.”

Andrews v. State, 658 S.E.2d 126 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “5 See OCGA §§ 40-2-5 (a) (1), (4); 40-2-6. 6 See Green v.”

Odum v. State, 469 S.E.2d 394 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “After a bench trial, Odum was convicted and sentenced on one count of driving after being declared a habitual violator and after having been notified that his driver’s license had been revoked, OCGA § 40-5-58 (c); one count of operating a motor vehicle without insurance, OCGA §…”

Gentry v. State, 513 S.E.2d 528 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “The State presented additional evidence, which Gentry does not challenge on appeal, sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty of the offenses of driving with no proof of insurance (OCGA § 40-6-10) and using a license plate for the purpose of concealing or…”

N. v. State, 645 S.E.2d 701 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “Citing OCGA §§ 40-2-5 and 40-2-7, Northern claims that this evidence reflected prior criminal conduct that improperly brought his character into evidence.”

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.