2020 Georgia Code
Title 16 - Crimes and Offenses
Chapter 8 - Offenses Involving Theft
Article 4 - Motor Vehicle Chop Shops and Stolen and Altered Property
§ 16-8-83. Owning, Operating, or Conducting a Chop Shop; Penalty

1. Any person who knowingly and with intent:
   1. Owns, operates, or conducts a chop shop;
   2. Transports any motor vehicle or motor vehicle part to or from a location knowing it to be a chop shop; or
   3. Sells, transfers, purchases, or receives any motor vehicle or motor vehicle part either to or from a location knowing it to be a chop shop

      shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years nor more than ten years, by a fine of not more than $100,000.00, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

2. Any person who knowingly alters, counterfeits, defaces, destroys, disguises, falsifies, forges, obliterates, or removes a vehicle identification number with the intent to misrepresent the identity or prevent the identification of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle part shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, by a fine of not more than $50,000.00, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
3. 1. Any person who buys, disposes, sells, transfers, or possesses a motor vehicle or motor vehicle part with knowledge that the vehicle identification number of the motor vehicle or motor vehicle part has been altered, counterfeited, defaced, destroyed, disguised, falsified, forged, obliterated, or removed shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, by a fine of not more than $50,000.00, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
   2. The provisions of paragraph (1) of this subsection shall not apply to a motor vehicle scrap processor who, in the normal legal course of business and in good faith, processes a motor vehicle or motor vehicle part by crushing, compacting, or other similar methods, provided that any vehicle identification number is not removed from the motor vehicle or motor vehicle part prior to or during any such processing.
   3. The provisions of paragraph (1) of this subsection shall not apply to any owner or authorized possessor of a motor vehicle recovered by law enforcement authorities after having been stolen or where the condition of the vehicle identification number of the motor vehicle or motor vehicle part is known to or has been reported to law enforcement authorities.It shall be presumed that law enforcement authorities have knowledge of all vehicle identification numbers on a motor vehicle or motor vehicle part which are altered, counterfeited, defaced, disguised, falsified, forged, obliterated, or removed when law enforcement authorities deliver or return the motor vehicle or motor vehicle part to its owner or authorized possessor after it has been recovered by law enforcement authorities after having been reported stolen.
4. A person commits the offense of attempted operation of a chop shop when, with the intent to commit a violation proscribed by subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this Code section, the person does any act which constitutes a substantial step toward the commission of a violation proscribed by subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this Code section; and such person shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than five years, by a fine of not more than $25,000.00, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
5. A person commits the offense of conspiracy when, with the intent that a violation proscribed by subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this Code section be committed, the person agrees with another to the commission of a violation proscribed by subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this Code section; and such person shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than five years, by a fine of not more than $25,000.00, or by both such fine and imprisonment.No person may be convicted of conspiracy under this subsection unless an act in furtherance of such agreement is alleged and proved to have been committed by that person or a coconspirator.
6. A person commits the offense of solicitation when, with the intent that a violation proscribed by subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this Code section be committed, the person commands, encourages, or requests another to commit a violation proscribed by subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this Code section; and such person shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than five years, by a fine of not more than $25,000.00, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
7. A person commits the offense of aiding and abetting when, either before or during the commission of a violation proscribed by subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this Code section and with the intent to promote or facilitate such commission, the person aids, abets, agrees, or attempts to aid another in the planning or commission of a violation proscribed by subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this Code section; and such person shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than five years, by a fine of not more than $25,000.00, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
8. A person is an accessory after the fact who maintains, assists, or gives any other aid to an offender while knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe the offender has committed a violation under subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this Code section; and such person shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than five years, by a fine of not more than $25,000.00, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
9. No prosecution shall be brought and no person shall be convicted of any violation under this Code section where the acts of such person otherwise constituting a violation were done in good faith in order to comply with the laws or regulations of any state or territory of the United States or of the United States government.
10. The sentence imposed upon a person convicted of any violation of this Code section shall not be reduced to less than one year of imprisonment for a second conviction or less than five years for a third or subsequent conviction, and no sentence imposed upon a person for a second or subsequent conviction of any violation of this Code section shall be suspended or reduced until such person shall have served the minimum period of imprisonment provided for in this Code section.A person convicted of a second or subsequent violation of this Code section shall not be eligible for probation, parole, furlough, or work release.
11. 1. In addition to any other punishment, a person who violates this Code section shall be ordered to make restitution to the lawful owner or owners of the stolen motor vehicle or vehicles or the stolen motor vehicle part or parts, to the owner's insurer to the extent that the owner has been compensated by the insurer, and to any other person for any financial loss sustained as a result of a violation of this Code section.
    2. For purposes of this Code section, the term:
       1. "Financial loss" shall include, but not be limited to, loss of earnings, out-of-pocket and other expenses, repair and replacement costs, and claims payments.
       2. "Lawful owner" shall include an innocent bona fide purchaser for value of a stolen motor vehicle or motor vehicle part who does not know that the motor vehicle or part is stolen or an insurer to the extent that such insurer has compensated a bona fide purchaser for value.
    3. The court shall determine the extent and method of restitution required under this subsection.In an extraordinary case, the court may determine that the best interests of the victim and justice would not be served by ordering restitution.In any such case, the court shall make and enter specific written findings on the record concerning the extraordinary circumstances presented which mitigated against restitution.

(Code 1981, §16-8-83, enacted by Ga. L. 1991, p. 1805, § 1; Ga. L. 1992, p. 6, § 16.)

- Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 1992, in the second sentence of subsection (e), "coconspirator" was substituted for "co-conspirator".

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Evidence sufficient for conviction.

- Evidence supported a conviction for operating a "chop shop" when the defendant admitted storing a vehicle that the defendant did not own and selling the vehicle to another person, and the car had a drive-out tag, a replaced steering column, and a missing door lock when the defendant obtained the vehicle; the person who provided the vehicle to the defendant had no proof of ownership, and when the defendant sold the automobile, multiple parts were missing, there was a discrepancy in the vehicle identification numbers on the windshield and on the engine, and the defendant admitted that the defendant had removed parts of the engine and failed to replace the parts before selling the vehicle. Maclin v. State, 287 Ga. App. 220, 651 S.E.2d 138 (2007).

Evidence that auto parts and a shell of a stolen car lacking a vehicle identification number plate were found at the defendant's home, that the defendant was always working on cars, and that it was apparent that a lot of work on cars occurred at the home was sufficient to convict the defendant of theft by receiving a stolen car, O.C.G.A. § 16-8-7(a), and operating a chop shop, O.C.G.A. § 16-8-82(1). Xiong v. State, 295 Ga. App. 697, 673 S.E.2d 86 (2009).

Because the evidence was more than sufficient for the jury to infer that the original vehicle identification numbers (VINs) on the vehicles allegedly registered to defendant were removed and replaced with false VINs, defendant was properly convicted of violating O.C.G.A. § 16-8-83(c)(1). Jarrett v. State, 299 Ga. App. 525, 683 S.E.2d 116 (2009).

- Although the defendant characterized the jury's verdicts finding the defendant guilty of operating a chop shop and of falsifying a vehicle identification number as mutually exclusive, the two guilty verdicts returned by the jury could be logically reconciled as a finding that a person wilfully removed or falsified the identification number of a vehicle does not logically exclude a finding that the person owned, operated, or conducted a premise in which the person knowingly altered a vehicle identification number with the intent of misrepresenting the vehicle's identity, and the defendant's challenge was actually predicated upon the inconsistent verdict rule, which had been abolished in Georgia. Wilmott v. State, 326 Ga. App. 1, 755 S.E.2d 818 (2014).