2020 Georgia Code
Title 16 - Crimes and Offenses
Chapter 12 - Offenses Against Public Health and Morals
Article 3 - Obscenity and Related Offenses


Cross references.

- Power of counties and municipalities to enact ordinances which have effect of restricting adult bookstores and adult movie houses to areas zoned for commercial or industrial purposes, § 36-60-3.

Use of telephone communications for obscene, threatening, or other purposes, § 46-5-21.

Use of telephone to transmit obscene, lewd, or other communications for commercial purposes, § 46-5-22.

Law reviews.

- For article discussing history of Georgia's written obscenity statutes from the 1860's to the late 1960's, see 19 Mercer L. Rev. 287 (1968). For article discussing obscenity laws and their conflict with U.S. Const., Amend. 1, see 8 Ga. L. Rev. 291 (1974). For article, "Misdemeanor Sentencing in Georgia," see 7 Ga. St. B.J. 8 (2001). For article, "Sex In and Out of Intimacy," see 59 Emory L.J. 809 (2010). For article, "Evil Angel Eulogy: Reflections on the Passing of the Obscenity Defense in Copyright," see 20 J. Intell. Prop. L. 209 (2013). For comment discussing the constitutional standard for judging obscenity, in light of Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 93 S. Ct. 2607, 37 L. Ed. 2d 419 (1973), see 10 Ga. St. B.J. 327 (1973).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Definition of obscenity set forth in former Code 1933, § 26-2101 et seq. was applicable to all sections dealing with same question. Jenkins v. State, 230 Ga. 726, 199 S.E.2d 183 (1973), rev'd on other grounds, 418 U.S. 153, 94 S. Ct. 2750, 41 L. Ed. 2d 642 (1974) (see O.C.G.A. Art. 3, Ch. 12, T. 16).

Possession of obscene material in privacy of home.

- State's power to regulate obscenity does not extend to mere possession in privacy of own home. Warshaw v. Eastman Kodak Co., 148 Ga. App. 670, 252 S.E.2d 182 (1979).

Right to privately possess obscene materials does not presuppose corollary constitutional right of unregulated access. Warshaw v. Eastman Kodak Co., 148 Ga. App. 670, 252 S.E.2d 182 (1979).

It would be against public policy to return obscene material to owner. Warshaw v. Eastman Kodak Co., 148 Ga. App. 670, 252 S.E.2d 182 (1979).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

- Publications of a scientific, educational or instructive character regarding sex relations as within statutes relating to obscene or immoral publications, 76 A.L.R. 1099.

Power of municipality in respect of inspection and censorship of motion-picture films, 126 A.L.R. 1363.

Entrapment to commit offense against obscenity laws, 77 A.L.R.2d 792.

Modern concept of obscenity, 5 A.L.R.3d 1158.

Validity of procedures designed to protect the public against obscenity, 5 A.L.R.3d 1214; 93 A.L.R.3d 297.

Exhibition of obscene motion pictures as nuisance, 50 A.L.R.3d 969.

What constitutes such discriminatory prosecution or enforcement of laws as to provide valid defense in state criminal proceedings, 95 A.L.R.3d 280.

In personam or territorial jurisdiction of state court in connection with obscenity prosecution of author, actor, photographer, publisher, distributor, or other party whose acts were performed outside the state, 16 A.L.R.4th 1318.

Processor's right to refuse to process or return film or video tape of obscene subject, 18 A.L.R.4th 1326.

Validity and application of statute exempting nonmanagerial, nonfinancially interested employees from obscenity prosecution, 35 A.L.R.4th 1237.

PART 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS

Law reviews.

- For article, "Sex In and Out of Intimacy," see 59 Emory L.J. 809 (2010).

Disclaimer: These codes may not be the most recent version. Georgia may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.