(Code 1933, § 68B-310, enacted by Ga. L. 1975, p. 1008, § 1; Ga. L. 1983, p. 487, § 1; Ga. L. 1984, p. 22, § 40; Ga. L. 1985, p. 758, § 8; Ga. L. 1990, p. 2048, § 4; Ga. L. 1992, p. 779, § 19.1; Ga. L. 1993, p. 940, § 4; Ga. L. 2004, p. 471, § 5; Ga. L. 2009, p. 679, § 5/HB 160; Ga. L. 2014, p. 710, § 1-11/SB 298; Ga. L. 2016, p. 443, § 4-4/SB 367.)
The 2016 amendment, effective July 1, 2016, in subsection (a), inserted "or her" near the end of the introductory paragraph and in paragraph (a)(3), added "the earlier of" at the end of the introductory paragraph, designated the existing provisions of paragraph (a)(1) as paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(3), substituted "Code Section 40-5-58;" for "Code Section 40-5-58 or" at the end of paragraph (a)(1), added paragraph (a)(2), added "Five years" at the beginning of paragraph (a)(3), and redesignated former paragraph (a)(2) as present paragraph (a)(4); added subsection (b); and redesignated former subsection (b) as present subsection (c).
Cross references.- Requirement of proof of financial responsibility for the future as prerequisite to restoration of driver's license to person convicted of offense for which license suspension is mandatory, § 40-9-81.
Law reviews.- For article on the effect on receiving government-issued licenses after a conviction based on a nolo contendere plea, see 13 Ga. L. Rev. 723 (1979). For article on the 2016 amendment of this Code section, see 33 Georgia St. U.L. Rev. 139 (2016).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
Revocation not criminal sentence.
- Revocation of a license pursuant to former Code 1933, § 68B-308 (see now O.C.G.A. § 40-5-58) was clearly not a criminal sentence. Cofer v. Hawthorne, 154 Ga. App. 875, 270 S.E.2d 84 (1980).
Delay in transmitting notification.
- Under O.C.G.A. § 40-5-53(b), a court of conviction is required to transmit notification of applicable convictions to the Georgia Department of Driver Services within 10 days of the date of conviction, but a trial court's failure to timely transmit the records, which failure results in delayed revocation of an individual's license, does not affect the validity of the revocation or the calculation of the five-year period. Eason v. Dozier, 298 Ga. App. 65, 679 S.E.2d 89 (2009), cert. denied, No. S09C1605, 2009 Ga. LEXIS 794 (Ga. 2009).
Revocation continues until restatement.
- Defendant was properly convicted of causing death while operating a vehicle after having been declared a habitual violator (O.C.G.A. § 40-6-393(c)) although the defendant was eligible to apply for a license under O.C.G.A. § 40-5-62(a)(1), the failure to apply for reinstatement of the license after five years elapsed meant that the revocation remained in effect. Greene v. State, 278 Ga. App. 848, 630 S.E.2d 123 (2006).
Cited in Williams v. State, 162 Ga. App. 415, 291 S.E.2d 732 (1982); Kimbrell v. State, 164 Ga. App. 344, 296 S.E.2d 206 (1982); Goblet v. State, 174 Ga. App. 675, 331 S.E.2d 56 (1985).
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Applicability of procedures.
- Procedures of former Code 1933, § 68B-310 (see now O.C.G.A. § 40-5-62), should be used without regard to whether the applicant habitual violator was properly determined to be such by the superior court or by the Department of Public Safety. 1980 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 80-94.
RESEARCH REFERENCES
Am. Jur. 2d.
- 7A Am. Jur. 2d, Automobiles and Highway Traffic, § 116.
C.J.S.- 60 C.J.S., Motor Vehicles, §§ 353 et seq., 359, 459.
ALR.- Suspension or revocation of driver's license for refusal to take sobriety test, 88 A.L.R.2d 1064.
Automobiles: validity and construction of legislation authorizing revocation or suspension of operator's license for "habitual," "persistent," or "frequent" violations of traffic regulations, 48 A.L.R.4th 367.