When the Georgia legislature adds a new misdemeanor offense, how do police know whether to take fingerprints from someone arrested for it, and which 2003 misdemeanors did the AG designate as fingerprintable?

Plain-English summary

The Georgia Crime Information Center (GCIC) maintains the state's criminal-history database. By statute (O.C.G.A. § 35-3-33), certain offenses are automatically fingerprintable, meaning that anyone arrested for them must be fingerprinted at booking and the prints get entered into GCIC. For misdemeanor offenses, the statute leaves a gap: the AG has authority under O.C.G.A. § 35-3-33(a)(1)(A)(v) to designate which misdemeanors are fingerprintable. The Deputy Director of GCIC sent this list of twelve misdemeanors enacted in the 2003 session and asked which should be designated.

AG Thurbert Baker designated 11 of the 12 as fingerprintable. The reasoning was generally pragmatic: offenses involving fraud against the state, threats to public safety, professional-licensing violations, and protective-order violations all warranted fingerprinting because the conduct was often part of a pattern, and identifying repeat offenders mattered for both prevention and prosecution.

Designated as fingerprintable:

1. O.C.G.A. § 4-4-6(a), knowingly introducing a foreign animal disease or any disease/syndrome/chemical/poison/toxin posing substantial threat to Georgia animal industries (high and aggravated misdemeanor).
2. O.C.G.A. § 4-4-6(b), failure to report (in the absence of good faith) the presence of certain listed animal diseases or unusual numbers of acute deaths.
3. O.C.G.A. § 16-5-95(a), violation of a family violence order.
4. O.C.G.A. § 16-9-58, failure to pay for agricultural products or chattels (under $500) within 20 days following receipt, with fraudulent intent. (The over-$500 version is already a felony and so already fingerprintable; the AG designated the misdemeanor version "to promote uniformity in the treatment of similar offenses which differ only in degree based upon a monetary amount.")
5. O.C.G.A. § 16-12-125(a), avoiding or interfering with a "properly functioning" security measure (high and aggravated misdemeanor). The version with intent to commit a felony was already fingerprintable; the AG designated this one too "to promote uniformity."
6. O.C.G.A. § 40-5-159(b), employer's failure to report fraudulent information regarding employee employment or experience under federal CDL standards (49 C.F.R. Part 383). The AG explained: "to promote uniformity in treatment recognizing the severity of the offense of fraudulently reporting information to a state agency."
7. O.C.G.A. § 40-6-10(c), knowingly making a false statement or certification under O.C.G.A. § 40-5-71 (driver license proof). The AG noted that knowingly submitting fraudulent information to a state agency could subject the person to felony charges under § 16-10-20.
8. O.C.G.A. § 40-6-326, operating an electric personal assistive mobility device (EPAMD) on any highway or sidewalk while under the influence of liquor or drugs. (This was a then-novel category, designed for devices like the Segway that had emerged in the early 2000s.)
9. O.C.G.A. § 43-4B-21(c), engaging in "unarmed combat" as defined in O.C.G.A. § 43-4B-1 (high and aggravated misdemeanor).
10. O.C.G.A. § 43-5-7, acting as an athletic trainer without a license (high and aggravated misdemeanor).
11. O.C.G.A. § 43-50-45(a), practicing veterinary medicine without a license.
12. O.C.G.A. § 46-5-27(f)(2), compiling and disseminating information from the telephone subscriber database for illegitimate purposes.

Not designated as fingerprintable:

• O.C.G.A. § 40-6-10 general offense (failure to maintain proof of insurance). The AG declined to designate this one. The presumption was that running someone for an insurance violation didn't warrant the booking footprint of fingerprinting.

The opinion's pattern across the 12 offenses reveals an internal AG policy: any offense involving fraudulent statements or fraud against the state is fingerprintable; any offense involving repeat-offender risk or licensing-board enforcement is fingerprintable; ordinary regulatory violations are not.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2005. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

The AG's fingerprintable-offense designations evolve session by session as new offenses are enacted and as later AGs review and supplement prior designations. The 2005 designation list applied to 2003-session offenses; for current designations, consult the most recent AG opinion in the GCIC fingerprintable series and the current version of O.C.G.A. § 35-3-33.

Common questions

Q: Why does fingerprinting matter for a misdemeanor?
A: Fingerprinting at booking creates a permanent GCIC record tied to the arrest. That record is searchable in subsequent investigations and shows up in criminal-history checks for licensing, employment, immigration, and federal background-check purposes. For misdemeanors that often signal pattern behavior (family-violence-order violations, fraud, professional-licensing violations), the fingerprint footprint helps later cases identify repeat actors.

Q: Does the AG designation affect whether the offense is a misdemeanor or a felony?
A: No. The designation only determines whether arresting officers must take fingerprints and submit them to GCIC. The classification of the offense (misdemeanor, high-and-aggravated misdemeanor, felony) is set by the underlying criminal statute.

Q: Can a defendant be charged with the underlying offense without fingerprinting?
A: Yes, but Georgia practice generally requires fingerprinting at booking for any designated fingerprintable offense. Failure to fingerprint isn't a defense to the underlying charge; it's a procedural failure the law enforcement agency would need to correct.

Q: What's an EPAMD?
A: Electric Personal Assistive Mobility Device. The category was created for self-balancing single-rider electric vehicles like the Segway, which emerged in the early 2000s. The 2003 statute extended DUI principles to operation of these devices on highways and sidewalks.

Q: What about hoverboards or e-scooters today?
A: The 2005 opinion didn't address devices that didn't yet exist. Whether modern e-scooters or hoverboards are "EPAMDs" or fall under a different category is a separate question requiring analysis of current statutes, which have been amended multiple times since 2005.

Q: Why is "unlawful unarmed combat" a fingerprintable offense?
A: Georgia regulates professional combative sports (boxing, MMA, etc.) through the Georgia Athletic and Entertainment Commission. "Unarmed combat" in this statute refers to participating in or staging unsanctioned combat events outside the regulatory framework. Designating the misdemeanor as fingerprintable lets GCIC track repeat actors in the unsanctioned-fight scene.

Q: What was the telephone subscriber database referenced in § 46-5-27(f)(2)?
A: A state-level no-call/do-not-call database that collected the phone numbers of Georgia residents who didn't want telemarketing calls. The federal Do Not Call Registry (which started operating in 2003) was much larger and largely absorbed the function of state lists. The AG noted: "I understand that much of the information contained in the data base has been merged into the later established federal data base."

Background and statutory framework

Georgia's GCIC is the state's central repository for criminal-history information. Under O.C.G.A. § 35-3-33, the Attorney General has the authority to designate offenses as "fingerprintable": meaning that arresting agencies must take fingerprints and submit them to GCIC. For felonies, the designation is largely automatic; for misdemeanors, the AG reviews newly enacted offenses session by session and designates which warrant the GCIC fingerprint footprint.

The interpretive policy behind these designations isn't articulated in any one place, but the pattern across multiple AG opinions in this series (and contemporaneous opinions like Op. Att'y Gen. 2005-8 covering 2004 offenses) reveals consistent themes: fraud against the state, repeat-offender risk, professional-licensing violations, and protective-order violations all get fingerprinted; ordinary administrative or regulatory violations generally don't.

The 2005-7 list reflects the 2003 General Assembly session's misdemeanor enactments. Several of these offenses respond to specific concerns of the early 2000s: foreign animal disease (post-9/11 agroterrorism preparedness), CDL fraud (federal Patriot Act and Real ID emphasis on commercial driver vetting), EPAMDs (Segway), security measure interference (anti-terrorism), and telephone subscriber database misuse (early do-not-call enforcement).

The opinion's pattern of explanation is consistent: the AG identifies the new misdemeanor, briefly explains what it prohibits, and then either designates it as fingerprintable (often with a one-sentence rationale tied to uniformity, severity, or fraud) or declines to designate it. The 11-of-12 designation rate suggests a strong default toward fingerprinting new misdemeanors absent a specific reason not to.

Citations and references

Statutes:
- O.C.G.A. § 35-3-33(a)(1)(A)(v) (AG designation authority)
- O.C.G.A. § 4-4-6(a), (b) (foreign animal disease)
- O.C.G.A. § 16-5-95(a) (family violence order violation)
- O.C.G.A. § 16-9-58 (agricultural products payment fraud)
- O.C.G.A. § 16-10-20 (false statements to government)
- O.C.G.A. § 16-12-125(a) (security measure interference)
- O.C.G.A. § 40-5-71 (driver license false statement)
- O.C.G.A. § 40-5-159(b) (CDL employer fraud)
- O.C.G.A. § 40-6-10 and (c) (insurance proof and false certification)
- O.C.G.A. § 40-6-326 (EPAMD under influence)
- O.C.G.A. § 43-4B-1 and 43-4B-21(c) (unarmed combat)
- O.C.G.A. § 43-5-7 (athletic trainer license)
- O.C.G.A. § 43-50-45(a) (veterinary medicine license)
- O.C.G.A. § 46-5-27(f)(2) (telephone subscriber database)
- 49 C.F.R. Part 383 (federal CDL standards)

Source

• Landing page: https://law.georgia.gov/opinions/2005-7
• Original PDF: not linked from landing page

Original opinion text

You have requested my opinion concerning whether any of the following twelve misdemeanor offenses enacted during the 2003 Session of the General Assembly should be designated as offenses for which persons charged with violations are to be fingerprinted. Those offenses include: O.C.G.A. § 4-4-6(a) (knowing introduction of foreign animal disease); O.C.G.A. § 4-4-6(b) (failure to report certain animal diseases, syndromes, or conditions); O.C.G.A. § 16-5-95(a) (violation of a family violence order); O.C.G.A. § 16-9-58 (failure to pay for agricultural products or chattels with fraudulent intent-less than $500.00); O.C.G.A. § 16-12-125(a) (avoiding or interfering with a security measure); O.C.G.A. § 40-5-159(b) (employer reporting fraudulent information regarding an employee's employment or experience in violation of 49 C.F.R. Part 383); O.C.G.A. § 40-6-10 (no proof of insurance); O.C.G.A. § 40-6-326 (operating electric personal assistive mobility device while under the influence of liquor or drugs); O.C.G.A. § 43-4B-21(c) (unlawful unarmed combat); O.C.G.A. § 43-5-7 (acting as an athletic trainer without a license); O.C.G.A. § 43-50-45(a) (practicing veterinary medicine without a license); and O.C.G.A. § 46-5-27(f)(2) (compiling and disseminating information from a telephone subscriber database for illegitimate purposes). In addition to the list of fingerprintable offenses mandated by statute, O.C.G.A. § 35-3-33(a)(1)(A)(v) provides that the Attorney General may designate any other offense as one for which those charged with violations are to be fingerprinted. The first misdemeanor offense is O.C.G.A. § 4-4-6(a). That Code section provides that it shall be a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature knowingly to introduce into this state any foreign animal disease or any animal disease, syndrome, chemical, poison, or toxin that may pose a substantial threat of harm to the state's animal industries. The 2003 amendment makes the knowing introduction of such diseases, syndromes, or conditions which pose a substantial threat to the animal industries a misdemeanor offense of a high and aggravated nature. I hereby designate offenses arising under O.C.G.A. § 4-4-6(a) as offenses for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. The second misdemeanor offense is O.C.G.A. § 4-4-6(b). That Code section provides that any person who makes a clinical diagnosis or laboratory confirmation of or who reasonably suspects the presence or occurrence of any one of a number of listed diseases, syndromes, or conditions, including an unusual number of acute deaths, or highly infectious or contagious conditions in animals, shall make a report of said disease, syndrome or condition to the state veterinarian or the United States Department of Agriculture area veterinarian in charge. The 2003 amendment removed the defense of good faith and declared the failure to report a misdemeanor. I hereby designate offenses arising under O.C.G.A. § 4-4-6(b) as offenses for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. The third misdemeanor offense is O.C.G.A. § 16-5-95(a). That Code section provides that it shall be a misdemeanor for any person to violate a family violence order. I hereby designate offenses arising under O.C.G.A. § 16-5-95(a) as offenses for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. The fourth misdemeanor offense is O.C.G.A. § 16-9-58. That Code section provides that it shall be a misdemeanor for any person with fraudulent intent to fail to pay for agricultural products or chattels (of a value less than $500.00) within twenty days following receipt of those products or chattels. The original statute, passed in 1983, designated the failure pay for such agricultural products or chattels a felony, which is a fingerprintable offense. The amended statute sets a $500.00 threshold below which the punishment is for a misdemeanor. In order to promote uniformity in the treatment of similar offenses which differ only in degree based upon a monetary amount, I hereby designate any misdemeanor offenses arising under O.C.G.A. § 16-9-58 as offenses for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. The fifth misdemeanor offense is O.C.G.A. § 16-12-125(a). That Code section provides that it shall be a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature for any person to avoid or interfere with a "properly functioning" security measure. This conduct was designated a misdemeanor by the 2002 General Assembly unless the act was committed with the intent to commit a felony; the requirement that the security measure be a "properly functioning" one was added by the 2003 General Assembly. Offenses arising under O.C.G.A. § 16-12-125(a) which are committed with the intent to commit a felony are already designated as offenses for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. To promote uniformity, I hereby designate any misdemeanor offenses arising under O.C.G.A. § 16-12-125(a) as offenses for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. The sixth misdemeanor offense is O.C.G.A. § 40-5-159(b). That Code section provides that it shall be a misdemeanor for any employer to fail to report fraudulent information regarding an employee's employment or experience in violation of 49 C.F.R. Part 383, which establishes federal commercial driver's license standards, requirements, and penalties. Although this section was enacted prior to 2003, it has not yet been designated as a fingerprintable offense. To promote uniformity in treatment recognizing the severity of the offense of fraudulently reporting information to a state agency, at this time I designate offenses arising under O.C.G.A. § 40-5-159(b) as offenses for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. The seventh misdemeanor offense is O.C.G.A. § 40-6-10. That Code section provides that it shall be a misdemeanor for any person to fail to have and maintain proof of insurance on a motor vehicle. An offense arising from a violation of this Code section does not, at this time, appear to be an offense for which fingerprinting is required and I am not, at this time, designating this offense as one for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. However, subsection (c) of O.C.G.A. § 40-6-10 provides that a person who knowingly makes a false statement or certification under Code section 40 5 71 is guilty of a misdemeanor. Knowingly submitting fraudulent information to a state agency is a serious offense which could subject the person to felony charges under O.C.G.A. § 16-10-20; therefore, at this time I designate offenses arising under O.C.GA. § 40-6-10(c) only as offenses for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. The eighth misdemeanor offense is O.C.G.A. § 40-6-326. That Code section provides that it shall be a misdemeanor for any person to operate an electric personal assistive mobility device on any highway or sidewalk while under the influence of liquor or drugs. I hereby designate offenses arising under O.C.G.A. § 40-6-326 as offenses for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. The ninth misdemeanor offense is O.C.G.A. § 43-4B-21(c). That Code section provides that it shall be a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature for any person to engage in unarmed combat as defined in O.C.G.A. § 43-4B-1. I hereby designate offenses arising under O.C.G.A. § 43-4B-21(c) as offenses for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. The tenth misdemeanor offense is O.C.G.A. § 43-5-7, which provides that it shall be a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature for any person to act as an athletic trainer without a license as set forth in O.C.G.A. § 43-5-7. I hereby designate offenses arising under O.C.G.A. § 43-5-7 as offenses for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. The eleventh misdemeanor offense is O.C.G.A. § 43-50-45(a). That Code section provides that it shall be a misdemeanor for any person to engage in the practice of veterinary medicine without a license. I hereby designate offenses arising under O.C.G.A. § 43-50-45(a) as offenses for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. The twelfth misdemeanor offense is O.C.G.A. § 46-5-27(f)(2). That Code section provides that it shall be a misdemeanor for any person to compile and disseminate information from the telephone subscriber database established under this Code section. While I understand that much of the information contained in the data base has been merged into the later established federal data base, the offense of compiling and disseminating potentially sensitive information appears to be one for which fingerprinting is appropriate, and I hereby designate offenses arising from a violation of this Code section as offenses for which those charged are to be fingerprinted. I trust that my revisions of the specific designations of those offenses for which persons charged with violations are to be fingerprinted will aid you in discharging your duties pursuant to the Georgia Crime Information Act. Prepared by: KAY BAKER Assistant Attorney General