History

     SB 117 was introduced at the request of the Georgia Sheriffs’ Association.[1] Also, legislators “believed that there were instances in which sheriffs [in Georgia] had abused their authority.”[2] The widely publicized accusations of corruption and scandal which surrounded former Dekalb County Sheriff Sidney Dorsey was most prominent in legislators’ minds during this legislation’s inception.[3] The grand jury had indicted Dorsey for the murder of Sheriff-elect Derwin Brown.[4] The State had also charged Dorsey with using Dekalb County deputies under his power to work at a security firm he owned.[5] Furthermore, Dekalb District Attorney J. Tom Morgan alleged that Dorsey coerced on-duty deputies to act as chauffeurs for his family and friends and that he accepted sexual and monetary bribes from a Dekalb County bonding company owner.[6] The District Attorney also accused Dorsey of prematurely releasing from incarceration a friend and former employee of his security company.[7] Sheriff-elect Brown had pledged to uncover scandals involving Dorsey, and investigators subsequently linked Brown’s murder to Dorsey’s corrupt actions.[8]

     After the scandal unfolded in Dekalb County, legislators recognized that “a great potential for conflicts of interest” exists when a sheriff engages in activities such as private security, investigation, or bail bonding.[9] The bill was proposed as an effort to avoid these conflicts of interest and was supported by the Georgia Sheriffs’ Association.[10] The Georgia Sheriffs’ Association was primarily concerned with protecting the integrity of sheriffs and had previously sponsored an identical bill in the House.[11]

SB 117

     Senators Bill Hamrick, Charlie Tanksley, Steve Thompson, Daniel Lee, and Rene Kemp of the 30th, 32nd, 33rd, 27th, and 3rd districts, respectively, sponsored SB 117.[12] The bill was assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee on February 11, 2003.[13] The Senate Committee favorably reported the bill on March 4, 2003, adding minor changes.[14] The Senate passed the bill, as substituted, by a vote of 45 to 5 on March 6, 2003.[15]

     The Speaker assigned the bill on March 24, 2003 to the House Committee on Special Judiciary.[16] The House Committee favorably reported the bill on April 17, 2003, making two notable changes.[17] First, the House Committee changed the prohibition on a sheriff’s activities to apply only in the county in which the sheriff has jurisdiction.[18] Second, the House Committee prohibited only a sheriff’s unemancipated children from engaging in the prohibited activities.[19] The House passed the bill, as substituted, on April 22, 2003.[20]  The Senate agreed to the House substitute, without further change or discussion, on April 25, 2003, the final day of the legislative session.[21] On May 2, 2003, the Senate sent the bill to Governor Sonny Perdue, who signed the bill on May 29, 2003.[22]

The Act

     The Act adds new Code section 15-16-4.1, which prohibits a sheriff from engaging, either directly or indirectly, in a private security, private investigation, bail bonding, or wrecker towing business.[23] Code section 15-16-4.1 does not prohibit a sheriff from engaging in prohibited activities outside the county in which that sheriff has jurisdiction, nor does it prohibit a sheriff’s emancipated children from engaging in prohibited activities.[24]

Courtney Elizabeth Marcelo