Proo v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Benham, Judge.
Appellants were all convicted of DUI. Their appeals have been consolidated because they all rely exclusively on the same defense and there are no other issues involved in these appeals.
The essence of the position taken by appellants is that the legislature, in the 1988 amendment to OCGA § 40-6-391, repealed the prohibition against driving under the influence of alcohol. We do not find the legislature’s language susceptible of the interpretation appellants have placed on it, but even assuming it to be ambiguous in meaning, application of the rules of statutory construction…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Barton v. AtkinsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1972
3Cited by12 opinions
- Clay v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1989
- State v. LusterCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1992
- Dixon v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1990
- Latham v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1997
- Cronan v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1999
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.