shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature.
(c.1)Subsections (b) and (c) of this Code section shall not apply to:
(Ga. L. 1973, p. 719, §§ 1, 2; Ga. L. 1994, p. 1012, § 5; Ga. L. 2002, p. 1078, § 1; Ga. L. 2006, p. 519, § 4/HB 1302; Ga. L. 2014, p. 432, § 2-10/HB 826; Ga. L. 2014, p. 599, § 3-4/HB 60.)
The 2014 amendments. The first 2014 amendment, effective July 1, 2014, substituted the present provisions of the first sentence of subsection (a) for the former provisions, which read: "It shall be unlawful for any person to remain upon the premises or within the school safety zone as defined in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of Code Section 16-11-127.1 of any public or private school in this state or to remain upon such premises or within such school safety zone when that person does not have a legitimate cause or need to be present thereon."; in paragraph (b)(1), substituted "present in or on any school safety zone" for "present upon the premises or within the school safety zone of any public or private school" near the beginning and substituted "school safety zone" for "premises" near the end; and added subsection (g). The second 2014 amendment, effective July 1, 2014, deleted "paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of" following "as defined in" in the first sentence of subsection (a).
Cross references.- Criminal penalty for failure to leave ground of public school when so directed, § 16-11-35.
Law reviews.- For article on the 2014 amendment of this Code section, see 31 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 47 (2014).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
Principal's authority to control visitors.
- O.C.G.A. § 20-2-1180 does not impart a ministerial duty on school officials, rather, the statute imposes a duty on third party visitors and gives school principals discretionary authority to control visitors. Teston v. Collins, 217 Ga. App. 829, 459 S.E.2d 452 (1995).
Instruction to remove oneself from school premises must occur on occasion in question.
- Dismissal of an indictment for loitering on school premises was required because O.C.G.A. § 20-2-1180(b)(1) made it a crime for a defendant to fail to remove oneself from school premises after being told to do so; in this case, it was alleged that the defendant was told to leave on a prior occasion, not the date in question. State v. Freeman, 349 Ga. App. 94, 825 S.E.2d 538 (2019).
Evidence insufficient.
- Defendant was entitled to reversal of a conviction for loitering upon school premises because the evidence showed that from the time the assistant principal first spoke with the defendant and walked out of the building with the defendant, two to four minutes elapsed and that the principal's conversation with the defendant and the defendant's conversation with police took place only seconds apart, and then the defendant left. Isenhower v. State, 324 Ga. App. 380, 750 S.E.2d 703 (2013).
Cited in Phillips v. State, 240 Ga. 453, 241 S.E.2d 203 (1978); Darnell v. Houston County Bd. of Educ., 234 Ga. App. 488, 506 S.E.2d 385 (1998); In the Interest of M.P., 279 Ga. App. 344, 631 S.E.2d 383 (2006).
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Fingerprinting required for violators.
- Those charged with offenses under O.C.G.A. § 20-2-1180 are to be fingerprinted. 2007 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 2007-1.
RESEARCH REFERENCES
Am. Jur. 2d.
- 75 Am. Jur. 2d, Trespass, § 168 et seq.
ALR.- Validity and construction of statute or ordinance forbidding unauthorized persons to enter upon or remain in school building or premises, 50 A.L.R.3d 340.
Validity, construction, and application of loitering statutes and ordinances, 72 A.L.R.5th 1.