Court Opinion

ID: 9846190
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 03:36:32.670073+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:16:34.958212
License: Public Domain

Barnes, Judge,
concurring specially.
Although I concur fully with all that is said in the majority opinion, I write separately to express my concern over the practice of police officers randomly, and apparently without any justification, checking license tags of lawfully driving motorists through the National Crime Information Center. I am not aware of anything in our law that would justify such a practice.
Moreover, the practice is not authorized by OCGA§ 40-6-10, the governing Code section. Instead, OCGA§ 40-6-10 (a) (5) directs that
[e] very law enforcement officer in this state shall determine if the operator of a motor vehicle subject to the provisions of this Code section has the required minimum insurance coverage every time the law enforcement officer stops the vehicle or requests the presentation of the driver’s license of the operator of the vehicle.
(Emphasis supplied.) Nothing in this Code section contemplates the practice employed by the officer in this case. Contrary to the State’s argument, if the General Assembly wanted police to have the option of checking the insurance status of every driver on the road, it could have done so. That it failed to do so indicates that the General Assembly intended to allow drivers to retain some modicum of *265privacy while operating their vehicles lawfully on the public roadway. Accordingly, in addition to the reasons stated in the majority opinion, I would affirm the trial court because the officer had no authority to conduct the National Crime Information Center check in the first instance.