From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State of Georgia v. Luke

Court of Appeals of Georgia
May 21, 1987
183 Ga. App. 182 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987)

Summary

In Luke, the Georgia Court of Appeals held that an assistant district attorney's participation in the preliminary hearing at which testimony concerning the seizure was elicited constituted constructive notice of that seizure to the district attorney.

Summary of this case from State v. Sims

Opinion

73999.

DECIDED MAY 21, 1987. REHEARING DENIED JUNE 3, 1987.

Condemnation. Fulton Superior Court. Before Judge Eldridge.

Lewis R. Slaton, District Attorney, Benjamin H. Oehlert III, Joseph J. Drolet, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellant.

John W. Moulton, for appellee.


When appellee was arrested on March 1, 1985, cash amounting to more than $18,000 was found in his car and on his person. At a preliminary hearing on March 4, 1985, an assistant district attorney participated on appellant's behalf. During the hearing, the arresting officer testified that the money was taken from appellee's car. Copies of the incident report relating to the arrest and seizure were received by the district attorney's office on March 11, 1985. A petition for condemnation of the money seized from appellee was filed on April 5, 1985. This appeal is from the grant of summary judgment to appellee on the ground that the petition was not timely filed.

The condemnation proceeding was controlled by OCGA § 16-13-49 (e), which requires that the district attorney bring an action for condemnation within 30 days of his receipt of notice of the seizure. This court has held, as the trial court noted in its order, that the failure to comply with that time requirement prevents forfeiture. State of Ga. v. Ellis, 156 Ga. App. 779 (1) ( 275 S.E.2d 361) (1980). The trial court also noted that the statute does not specifically provide for a particular mode of notice to the district attorney, that constructive knowledge of the seizure has been construed as notice sufficient to commence the running of the time period, and that an assistant district attorney was present at appellee's preliminary hearing at which testimony concerning the seizure was elicited. Based on those considerations, the trial court determined that this court's decision in State of Ga. v. Waters, 173 Ga. App. 274 (2) ( 326 S.E.2d 243) (1985), required the conclusion that the assistant district attorney's participation in the hearing constituted notice to the district attorney and that the petition filed in this case was, therefore, untimely. We agree.

Appellant's reliance on O'Neal v. Spencer, 203 Ga. 588 ( 47 S.E.2d 646) (1948), and Lang v. State, 168 Ga. App. 693 (4) ( 310 S.E.2d 276) (1983), for the proposition that the language of the statute is not mandatory and that, there being no penalty in the statute for non-compliance, the untimeliness of the filing of the petition does not entitle appellee to summary judgment, is misplaced. O'Neal deals not with condemnation, but with a statute regarding appointment of members of a board of education. Lang did concern the same statute, but the language on which appellant relies concerned a totally different action required by the statute. The facts of that case were that the notice and petition were timely. Neither of the cases cited by appellant requires reversal.

Judgment affirmed. Banke, P. J., and Carley, J., concur.

DECIDED MAY 21, 1987 — REHEARING DENIED JUNE 3, 1987.


Summaries of

State of Georgia v. Luke

Court of Appeals of Georgia
May 21, 1987
183 Ga. App. 182 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987)

In Luke, the Georgia Court of Appeals held that an assistant district attorney's participation in the preliminary hearing at which testimony concerning the seizure was elicited constituted constructive notice of that seizure to the district attorney.

Summary of this case from State v. Sims

In State of Ga. v. Luke, 183 Ga. App. 182 (358 S.E.2d 272) (1987), we followed this holding in Ellis, rejecting the argument that the 30-day requirement was directory rather than mandatory since there was no penalty in the statute for non-compliance.

Summary of this case from Alford v. State

In State v. Luke, 183 Ga. App. 182, 358 S.E.2d 272 (1987), the Waters rationale was followed where suit was not filed within the required thirty days.

Summary of this case from State v. Hampton
Case details for

State of Georgia v. Luke

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF GEORGIA v. LUKE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: May 21, 1987

Citations

183 Ga. App. 182 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987)
358 S.E.2d 272

Citing Cases

State v. Henderson

In examining the legislative intent behind the new statute, we note that, with regard to the predecessor…

Yoder v. State of Georgia

The previous statute did not provide a remedy for the owner of the seized property in circumstances in which…