Georgia CommonsHouse · Introduced · 2025-2026 Regular Session
HB 984: Crimes and offenses; court order to locate an alleged victim of child or elder abuse; provide
Last action March 6, 2026 · House Committee Favorably Reported By Substitute
A Georgia House bill would let superior courts order the location of a parent, guardian, or caretaker when a child or an elder or disabled adult under investigation for abuse is moved to an unknown address.
The summaries below were written by an AI model (claude-sonnet-5) from the text of the bill and are not part of it. Quote the text, not the summary. The stored text is the Comm Sub version, the latest the General Assembly's website lists.
In plain language
Under current Georgia law covering cruelty to children and exploitation of disabled adults, elder persons, and residents, investigators can struggle to check on a potential victim's welfare if that person is moved away from the address police have on file. This bill adds new provisions to two sections of Georgia's criminal code (O.C.G.A. §§ 16-5-70 and 16-5-102) letting a superior court in the county of the last known address issue an order to locate the parent, guardian, or other responsible person of record. To get the order, a law enforcement official must show the court that finding the person is necessary to complete an open investigation into suspected child abuse, or exploitation or intimidation of a disabled adult, elder person, or resident. The bill applies only while an investigation is open and the victim has been moved from a known to an unknown address. It repeals any conflicting laws but does not state a separate effective date beyond standard practice.
What the bill does
- Adds a new subsection to Georgia's cruelty to children law (O.C.G.A. § 16-5-70) allowing a superior court to order the location of a parent or guardian when an abused child has been moved to an unknown address.
- Adds a parallel new subsection to Georgia's law on exploitation and intimidation of disabled adults, elder persons, and residents (O.C.G.A. § 16-5-102) allowing the same kind of location order for a guardian of record.
- Limits use of these orders to cases with an open investigation into an alleged violation of the relevant Code section.
- Requires a law enforcement official to show the court that locating the person is necessary to complete the investigation before the order can be granted.
- Assigns jurisdiction for these orders to the superior court of the county tied to the victim's last known address.
- Repeals any existing state laws that conflict with these new provisions.
Who it affects
The bill affects law enforcement officials investigating suspected abuse of children, disabled adults, elder persons, or residents; superior court judges who would issue these location orders; and parents, guardians, or caretakers of record who could be ordered located by the court.
Why it matters
When a child or a vulnerable adult under investigation disappears from a known address, investigators currently may have no clear legal tool to compel disclosure of a new location. This bill gives law enforcement a specific court process to find the responsible caretaker so welfare checks and abuse investigations can continue.
Key provisions
- Section 1 amends O.C.G.A. § 16-5-70 (cruelty to children) by adding subsection (f), letting the superior court for the county of the child's known address grant an order to locate the parent or guardian of record during an open investigation.
- Section 2 amends O.C.G.A. § 16-5-102 (exploitation and intimidation of disabled adults, elder persons, and residents) by adding subsection (d), creating the same type of order for a guardian of record.
- Both new subsections require a law enforcement official to show the court that locating the person is necessary to complete the investigation.
- Section 3 repeals any conflicting state laws, a standard closing provision.
From the bill
“the superior court for the county of the known address may grant an order to locate the parent or guardian of record upon a showing by a law enforcement official an inquiry regarding the welfare and safety of the child is necessary to complete such investigation.”
“the superior court for the county of the known address may grant an order to locate the guardian of record upon a showing by a law enforcement official an inquiry regarding the welfare and safety of the disabled adult, elder person, or resident is necessary to complete such investigation.”
Discussed in meetings (6)
The House and Senate meetings that took this bill up, from their machine transcripts. Each account was written by Georgia Commons with AI and is not part of the record; the video is what was said.
House Judiciary Non-Civil Committee, February 17, 2026
From 0:48:09 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel
Summary by Georgia Commons: The sponsor said the substitute would let law enforcement seek a superior court order to locate a child, or a disabled or elderly adult with a guardian, whose safety was under investigation after moving from a known address. The sponsor described an abuse case in which a family repeatedly moved between counties. Two Griffin Police Department witnesses said a severely abused 10-year-old had gone through several counties without effective sharing of information or follow-up. They described difficulties obtaining a complete case file and said the child was withdrawn from school during an investigation. Members questioned DFCS follow-up, costs, application paperwork and whether magistrate judges should also issue orders. The sponsor said no application affidavit had been discussed during drafting and expected district attorneys to be involved in requests to superior court. A Frontline Policy Council witness supported the measure because of its judicial oversight. The sponsor reiterated that the bill also covered vulnerable adults. No vote was taken, and the chair said it would return to full committee the following week.
House Judiciary Non-Civil Committee, March 2, 2026
From 0:15:59 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel
Summary by Georgia Commons: The sponsor said HB 984 would let law enforcement seek a superior court order to locate a child, disabled adult or elderly person whose safety is under investigation after that person moves from a known address to an unknown address. The sponsor emphasized judicial oversight and said input from the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council helped narrow the substitute. A witness for Frontline Policy supported the proposal, saying moving a vulnerable person and cutting off access can prevent accountability and put lives at risk. No members asked questions. The chair said a vote would come later, but the transcript shows no vote.
House Judiciary Non-Civil Committee, March 5, 2026 (AM)
From 0:13:46 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel
Summary by Georgia Commons: The sponsor said HB 984 would allow law enforcement investigating the welfare of a child, disabled adult or elderly person to seek a superior court order to locate that person after a move from a known address to an unknown address. The sponsor said the judge would retain discretion over issuing the order based on probable cause, and described the proposal as a safety measure prompted by a tragic incident discussed by Griffin investigators. The sponsor reported working with prosecutors and juvenile court judges. There were no substantive questions or public testimony. The committee later approved a substitute by voice vote, with no vote count stated.
House Rules Committee, March 6, 2026
From 0:29:14 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel
Summary by Georgia Commons: The sponsor said HB 984 would allow law enforcement to ask a superior court judge for an order to locate and check the safety of a child, disabled adult or elderly person whose whereabouts become unknown during a welfare investigation. The sponsor said people sometimes move to avoid welfare checks or further investigation. There were no questions or recorded decisions.
Status timeline
- House Committee Favorably Reported By Substitute (House)
- House Second Readers (House)
- House First Readers (House)
- House Hopper (House)
Sponsors
- Beth Camp (R, HD-135)
- Karen Mathiak (R, HD-82)
- Joseph Gullett (R, HD-19)
- James Burchett (R, HD-176)
- Rick Townsend (R, HD-179)
- Jan Jones (R, HD-47)
Topics
- child abuse investigations
- elder abuse
- disabled adult protection
- court orders
- criminal law