O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 9-16-15 (2019)

Stay of civil forfeiture proceedings during pendency of criminal proceedings; effect of criminal conviction

✓ 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) For good cause shown by the state or the owner or interest holder of the property, the court may stay civil forfeiture proceedings during the pendency of criminal proceedings resulting from a related indictment or accusation until such time as the criminal proceedings result in a plea of guilty, a conviction after trial, or an acquittal after trial or are otherwise concluded before the trial court. (b) An acquittal or dismissal in a criminal proceeding shall not preclude civil forfeiture proceedings.

(c) A defendant convicted in any criminal proceeding shall be precluded from later denying the essential allegations of the criminal offense of which the defendant was convicted in any civil forfeiture proceeding against such defendant pursuant to this chapter, regardless of the pendency of an appeal from that conviction; provided, however, that the evidence of the pendency of an appeal shall be admissible. For the purposes of this subsection, the term ‘conviction’ means the result from a verdict or plea of guilty, including a plea of nolo contendere.

History

(Code 1981, § 9-16-15, enacted by Ga. L. 2015, p. 693, § 1-1/HB 233.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2018–2018 · leading case: Phillips v. Phillips., 820 S.E.2d 158 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018).
Phillips v. Phillips., 820 S.E.2d 158 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “14 *534 And to the *166 extent that Husband is claiming that Georgia's child support statute, OCGA § 9-16-15, is generally preempted by "federal law," that claim has already been rejected by the Georgia Supreme Court in Ward v.”
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.