State v. McDuff

Citations: 252 Ga. App. 183; 555 S.E.2d 213; 2001 Fulton County D. Rep. 3138; 2001 Ga. App. LEXIS 1158Docket: A01A2122

Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia; October 11, 2001; Georgia; State Appellate Court

Lead Opinion SummaryLead Opinion Original

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Richard Scott McDuff was stopped by Officer Greg Bradford for allegedly violating OCGA 40-8-76.1 (e) (3) by not securing two minor children with safety belts while they rode unrestrained in the open bed of his pickup truck on Cobb Parkway. The stop led to McDuff's arrest for DUI, and he received citations for both the seat belt violation and DUI. The State Court of Cobb County granted McDuff's motion to suppress the evidence, reasoning that since Georgia law permits minors to ride unrestrained in the open bed of a pickup truck as long as it is not on an interstate highway, there was no legal basis for the traffic stop. The trial court found that Cobb Parkway is not an interstate highway and determined that OCGA 40-8-79, which prohibits minors from riding in an uncovered bed on interstates, would be rendered unnecessary if OCGA 40-8-76.1 applied. 

Upon review, the appellate court reversed the trial court's decision, stating that the trial court misapplied the precedent set in In the Interest of B. C. G., which did not address seat belt laws but rather focused on the interpretation of OCGA 40-8-79 concerning interstate highways. The appellate court emphasized that the seat belt safety law, enacted in 1988 and amended in 1990 to exclude pickup trucks from the definition of 'passenger vehicle,' was relevant to this case. In 1993, the law was further amended to require that minors over four years old be restrained in passenger vehicles, clarifying the application of OCGA 40-8-76.1 in this context.

A driver of a passenger vehicle, including pickup trucks, can be fined up to $25 for failing to ensure that minor passengers over four years old wear seat belts. Upon conviction, the court must report this to the Department of Motor Vehicle Safety. Following a 1993 amendment, it is now illegal for drivers to allow any minor passenger, regardless of their seating position, to ride without a seat belt. The law specifically states that minors in pickup trucks must be restrained, as unrestrained children in the open bed pose significant safety risks, particularly given increased traffic speeds. The definition of 'passenger vehicle' was broadened to include pickup trucks with minors, countering any arguments that 'occupants' only refer to those in the cab. The legislation distinguishes between the seat belt requirement and the prohibition against minors riding unrestrained in the open bed of a pickup truck on interstates, emphasizing the higher dangers associated with interstate travel. Consequently, the trial court's ruling allowing minors to ride unrestrained in the open bed of a pickup truck on non-interstate roads is legally erroneous. The officer's testimony confirmed he observed no restraining devices in use for the children in the back of the pickup truck, highlighting enforcement challenges given the design of such vehicles.

OCGA 40-8-76.1 would not be enforceable if an officer were required to visually inspect the bed of a pickup truck to confirm that unrestrained children were compliant with safety laws. The officer's testimony and the trial court's agreement indicated that it is widely recognized that pickup truck beds typically lack lap belts. This lack of visibility regarding any restraining devices, along with the common understanding that seat belts are generally absent in these vehicles, justified the traffic stop to verify compliance with OCGA 40-8-76.1 (e) (3). The trial court found the officer credible and believed he had a valid reason for the stop; however, it ruled that the officer's basis did not constitute a violation of the law, which was determined to be a legal error. The judgment was reversed, with dissenting opinions from Andrews, P. J. and Miller, J.