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

O.C.G.A. § 40-8-34 (2019)

Color in lighting equipment

✓ O.C.G.A. (archive.org 2024 item): print volumes of 2004-2024, per-volume vintage; older volumes partly replaced by 2019 Release 73 text; no 2025 or 2026 Acts
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

The color in all lighting equipment covered in this title shall be in accordance with Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Standard J578, April, 1965, as thereafter revised or amended.

History

(Ga. L. 1974, p. 633, § 1; Code 1933, § 68E-215, enacted by Ga. L. 1982, p. 165, § 4; Code 1981, § 40-8-34, enacted by Ga. L. 1982, p. 165, § 10.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2013–2013 · leading case: Thammasack v. State, 747 S.E.2d 877 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Thammasack v. State, 747 S.E.2d 877 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 16× “He argued that OCGA § 40-8-34, the traffic code section governing the color of headlights, 1 was void for vagueness because it did not give motorists fair warning that headlights cannot be red.”
Jimmy Thammasack v. State, No. A13A1391 (Ga. Ct. App. Aug. 16, 2013). · cites it 16× “He argued that OCGA § 40-8-34, the traffic code section governing the color of headlights,1 was void for vagueness because it did not give motorists fair warning that headlights cannot be red.”
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.