 |
GEORGIA CODE (Last Updated: August 20, 2013) |
 |
Title 16. CRIMES AND OFFENSES |
|
|
Chapter 11. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER AND SAFETY |
|
|
Article 3. INVASIONS OF PRIVACY |
|
|
Part 1. WIRETAPPING, EAVESDROPPING, SURVEILLANCE, AND RELATED OFFENSES |
| § 16-11-60. Definitions |
| § 16-11-61. Peeping Toms |
| § 16-11-62. Eavesdropping, surveillance, or intercepting communication which invades privacy of another; divulging private message |
| § 16-11-63. Possession, sale, or distribution of eavesdropping devices |
| § 16-11-64. Interception of wire or oral transmissions by law enforcement officers |
| § 16-11-64.1. Application and issuance of order authorizing installation and use of pen register or trap and trace device |
| § 16-11-64.2. Emergency situation and other grounds authorizing installation and use of pen register or trap and trace device prior to order; time for order approving installation or use |
| § 16-11-64.3. Emergency situation; application for an investigation warrant |
| § 16-11-65. License to intercept telephonic communications for business service improvement; regulatory powers of Georgia Public Service Commission |
| § 16-11-66.1. Disclosure of stored wire or electronic communications; records; search warrants; issuance of subpoena; violation |
| § 16-11-67. Admissibility of evidence obtained in violation of part |
| § 16-11-68. Admissibility of privileged communications |
| § 16-11-69. Penalty for violations of part |
| § 16-11-70. Telephone records privacy protection |
REFS & ANNOS
TITLE 16 Chapter 11 Article 3 Part 1 NOTE
LAW REVIEWS. --For note, "The Online Zoom Lens: Why Internet Street-Level Mapping Technologies Demand Reconsideration of the Modern-Day Tort Notion of 'Public Privacy'," see 43 Ga. L. Rev. 575 (2009).
For comment on Bodrey v. Cape, 120 Ga. App. 859, 172 S.E.2d 643 (1969), see 7 Ga. St. B.J. 256 (1970).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
GA. L. 1968, P. 1249 GENERALLY DEFINES AND PROSCRIBES INVASIONS OF PRIVACY. Bilbo v. State, 142 Ga. App. 716, 236 S.E.2d 847 (1977), rev'd on other grounds, 240 Ga. 601, 242 S.E.2d 21 (1978).
VARIOUS SECTIONS OF GA. L. 1968, P. 1249 MUST BE CONSTRUED TOGETHER in order to determine legislative intent. Birge v. State, 142 Ga. App. 735, 236 S.E.2d 906 (1977), rev'd on other grounds, 240 Ga. 501, 241 S.E.2d 213, cert. denied, 436 U.S. 945, 98 S. Ct. 2847, 56 L. Ed. 2d 786 (1978).
PART NOT PREEMPTED BY FEDERAL LAW. --O.C.G.A. P. 1, Art. 3, Ch. 11, T. 16 provides greater protection to individual privacy rights than the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Street Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. § 2510 et seq., and, accordingly, was not preempted thereby. Bishop v. State, 241 Ga. App. 517, 526 S.E.2d 917 (1999).
CAUSE OF ACTION FOR INVASION OF PRIVACY THROUGH WIRETAPPING NOT DEPENDENT ON DISCLOSURE. --Georgia recognizes a cause of action for invasion of privacy through wiretapping irrespective of whether information obtained is published or disclosed. Awbrey v. Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., 505 F. Supp. 604 (N.D. Ga. 1980).
CITED in Satterfield v. State, 127 Ga. App. 528, 194 S.E.2d 295 (1972); Ansley v. Stynchcombe, 480 F.2d 437 (5th Cir. 1973); Cross v. Georgia, 581 F.2d 102 (5th Cir. 1978).
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
APPLICABILITY TO FEDERAL AGENCIES. --O.C.G.A. P. 1, Art. 3, Ch. 11, T. 16, governing use of telephone service observing equipment, is inapplicable to agencies of United States. 1974 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 74-36.
RESEARCH REFERENCES
ALR. --Validity of statute or ordinance interfering with privacy in restaurants, 5 ALR 965.
Bank's duty to customer or depositor not to disclose information as to his financial condition, 92 ALR2d 900.
Investigations and surveillance, shadowing and trailing, as violation of right of privacy, 13 ALR3d 1025.
Censorship and evidentiary use of unconvicted prisoners' mail, 52 ALR3d 548.
Uninvited entry into another's living quarters as invasion of privacy, 56 ALR3d 434.
Waiver or loss of right of privacy, 57 ALR3d 16.
Taking unauthorized photographs as invasion of privacy, 86 ALR3d 374.
Exchange among insurers of medical information concerning insured or applicant for insurance as invasion of privacy, 98 ALR3d 561.
Permissible warrantless surveillance, under state communications interception statute, by state or local law enforcement officer or one acting in concert with officer, 27 ALR4th 449.
Eavesdropping on extension telephone as invasion of privacy, 49 ALR4th 430.
Intrusion by news-gathering entity as invasion of right of privacy, 69 ALR4th 1059.
Bank's liability, under state law, for disclosing financial information concerning depositor or customer, 81 ALR4th 377.
For comment on Bodrey v. Cape, 120 Ga. App. 859, 172 S.E.2d 643 (1969), see 7 Ga. St. B.J. 256 (1970).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
GA. L. 1968, P. 1249 GENERALLY DEFINES AND PROSCRIBES INVASIONS OF PRIVACY. Bilbo v. State, 142 Ga. App. 716, 236 S.E.2d 847 (1977), rev'd on other grounds, 240 Ga. 601, 242 S.E.2d 21 (1978).
VARIOUS SECTIONS OF GA. L. 1968, P. 1249 MUST BE CONSTRUED TOGETHER in order to determine legislative intent. Birge v. State, 142 Ga. App. 735, 236 S.E.2d 906 (1977), rev'd on other grounds, 240 Ga. 501, 241 S.E.2d 213, cert. denied, 436 U.S. 945, 98 S. Ct. 2847, 56 L. Ed. 2d 786 (1978).
PART NOT PREEMPTED BY FEDERAL LAW. --O.C.G.A. P. 1, Art. 3, Ch. 11, T. 16 provides greater protection to individual privacy rights than the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Street Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. § 2510 et seq., and, accordingly, was not preempted thereby. Bishop v. State, 241 Ga. App. 517, 526 S.E.2d 917 (1999).
CAUSE OF ACTION FOR INVASION OF PRIVACY THROUGH WIRETAPPING NOT DEPENDENT ON DISCLOSURE. --Georgia recognizes a cause of action for invasion of privacy through wiretapping irrespective of whether information obtained is published or disclosed. Awbrey v. Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., 505 F. Supp. 604 (N.D. Ga. 1980).
CITED in Satterfield v. State, 127 Ga. App. 528, 194 S.E.2d 295 (1972); Ansley v. Stynchcombe, 480 F.2d 437 (5th Cir. 1973); Cross v. Georgia, 581 F.2d 102 (5th Cir. 1978).
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
APPLICABILITY TO FEDERAL AGENCIES. --O.C.G.A. P. 1, Art. 3, Ch. 11, T. 16, governing use of telephone service observing equipment, is inapplicable to agencies of United States. 1974 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 74-36.
RESEARCH REFERENCES
ALR. --Validity of statute or ordinance interfering with privacy in restaurants, 5 ALR 965.
Bank's duty to customer or depositor not to disclose information as to his financial condition, 92 ALR2d 900.
Investigations and surveillance, shadowing and trailing, as violation of right of privacy, 13 ALR3d 1025.
Censorship and evidentiary use of unconvicted prisoners' mail, 52 ALR3d 548.
Uninvited entry into another's living quarters as invasion of privacy, 56 ALR3d 434.
Waiver or loss of right of privacy, 57 ALR3d 16.
Taking unauthorized photographs as invasion of privacy, 86 ALR3d 374.
Exchange among insurers of medical information concerning insured or applicant for insurance as invasion of privacy, 98 ALR3d 561.
Permissible warrantless surveillance, under state communications interception statute, by state or local law enforcement officer or one acting in concert with officer, 27 ALR4th 449.
Eavesdropping on extension telephone as invasion of privacy, 49 ALR4th 430.
Intrusion by news-gathering entity as invasion of right of privacy, 69 ALR4th 1059.
Bank's liability, under state law, for disclosing financial information concerning depositor or customer, 81 ALR4th 377.