Georgia CommonsSenate · Engrossed · 2025-2026 Regular Session
SB 163: Brady Law Regulations; standards for bringing an action against the government for an unauthorized act relating to regulation of weapons; revise
Last action March 25, 2026 · House Committee Favorably Reported By Substitute
A House substitute to SB 163 rewrites how criminal discovery works in Georgia courts, setting new deadlines for prosecutors and defendants to exchange evidence, adds detailed expert witness disclosure rules, lets active law enforcement officers keep their voter registration address confidential, and updates how subpoenas are served on police agencies.
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, prosecutors generally had to hand over evidence no later than ten days before trial, and expert witness disclosure rules were less detailed. This bill (a House Judiciary Non-Civil Committee substitute to SB 163) replaces that with a schedule tied to arraignment: prosecutors and defendants who opt into discovery must generally exchange evidence within 30 days of arraignment but no later than 30 days before trial, and prosecutors must mail or email defendants a copy of the indictment or accusation within five days of filing. The bill adds a long list of required disclosures for expert witnesses, including their opinions, technical notes, protocols, and prior testimony history, with mandatory exclusion of expert testimony if these disclosures are not made (subject to court discretion). It also revises Georgia's voter address confidentiality law (O.C.G.A. § 21-2-225.1) to let active law enforcement officers request confidential registration addresses, and updates how subpoenas must be served on law enforcement units and child advocacy centers. The changes take effect July 1, 2026, and apply to motions, hearings, or trials starting on or after that date.
What the bill does
- Requires prosecutors to mail or email defendants a copy of any filed indictment or accusation within five days, unless arraignment happens sooner.
- Sets new discovery deadlines requiring the state to disclose evidence, statements, and criminal history within 30 days of arraignment but no later than 30 days before trial.
- Creates detailed new expert witness disclosure requirements, including opinions, technical data, qualifications, and past testimony, with automatic exclusion of testimony for noncompliance unless a court allows an alternative remedy.
- Lets active law enforcement officers request that county boards of registrars keep their home voter registration address confidential, expanding a protection previously limited mainly to domestic violence victims.
- Changes how subpoenas are served on law enforcement units and child advocacy centers by requiring agencies to designate specific staff to receive them.
- Rewrites deadlines for filing pretrial motions so they run from the state's compliance with discovery rather than a fixed ten days after arraignment.
Who it affects
Prosecutors and defense attorneys handling Georgia criminal cases, criminal defendants, expert witnesses (including forensic scientists), law enforcement officers seeking voter address confidentiality, county boards of registrars, and law enforcement agencies and child advocacy centers that receive subpoenas.
Why it matters
The bill shifts when and how quickly evidence must change hands in criminal cases, which can affect how much time defense attorneys have to review evidence before trial. The new expert witness rules, backed by possible exclusion of testimony for noncompliance, could change how forensic and expert evidence is used in court. Extending address confidentiality to police officers as voters also creates a new privacy protection tied to their profession.
Key provisions
- Section 1 requires the state to mail or email a copy of a filed indictment to the defendant within five days of filing, unless arraignment occurs first.
- Section 3 ties pretrial motion deadlines to the state's discovery compliance, generally requiring motions within 30 days of that compliance and no later than 30 days before trial.
- Section 4 overhauls Chapter 16 discovery rules, setting a 30-day-after-arraignment, 30-day-before-trial deadline for the state to disclose defendant statements, criminal history, physical evidence, and scientific reports.
- Section 4 also creates new expert witness disclosure requirements (opinions, technical data, qualifications, prior testimony lists) and requires exclusion of expert testimony if these disclosures are not timely made, absent an alternative court remedy.
- Section 5 amends O.C.G.A. § 21-2-225.1 to let active law enforcement officers, verified by POST certification or their employing agency, request confidential voter registration addresses.
- Sections 6 and 7 revise subpoena service rules in O.C.G.A. §§ 24-13-23 and 24-13-24, requiring law enforcement units and child advocacy centers to designate staff to receive subpoenas.
- Section 8 corrects a cross-reference in O.C.G.A. § 35-3-151 concerning the Division of Forensic Sciences' role in facilitating independent testing of evidence.
- Section 9 sets the effective date as July 1, 2026, applying to motions, hearings, or trials starting on or after that date.
From the bill
“the state or prosecuting attorney shall mail or email a copy of an indictment filed with the court to the defendant and his or her attorney of record, if known, within five days of such filing”
“failure by the state or prosecuting attorney to furnish the defendant with a copy of any written scientific report or summary of an expert's opinion shall, unless the court determines an alternative remedy is warranted under the circumstances, result in such report or summary, and any related expert testimony, being excluded and suppressed from evidence”
“Is a law enforcement officer, as defined in Code Section 50-18-78.”
Discussed in meetings (3)
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, March 24, 2026
From 1:19:34 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel
Summary by Georgia Commons: The chair offered a substitute replacing all of SB 163, including its title, with criminal evidence-sharing legislation previously approved by the committee. The chair said the original bill’s substance had passed the previous session. The chair outlined changes addressing copies of filed indictments, additional defense motions based on disclosed evidence, written agreement to use the rules in misdemeanor courts without juries, and limits on copying materials available only for inspection. The chair also described a process for active law enforcement officers to request confidentiality for home addresses in voter records. Two Georgia Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers witnesses said public records had been used to expose officers’ addresses and that another provision would allow subpoenas to be served through a designated person at an officer’s agency. They said this would avoid tracking officers down personally and reduce delays. Asked whether the privacy provision removed an officer entirely from voter records, witnesses said they believed it covered only the address. A member asked how voters could challenge an elected sheriff’s residency; a witness promised to seek an answer. The committee approved the substitute by voice vote, with no further amendments or vote count stated.
House Rules Committee, March 27, 2026
From 0:29:12 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel
Summary by Georgia Commons: The presenter said SB 163 was being used to carry a proposal previously considered before crossover to modernize Georgia’s criminal discovery process, the exchange of evidence in criminal cases. The presenter said the original subject had been taken up by the House near the end of the prior session and might still await Senate agreement. There were no questions or further action shown.
Status timeline
- House Committee Favorably Reported By Substitute (House)
- House Withdrawn, Recommitted (House)
- House Second Readers (House)
- House First Readers (House)
- Senate Passed/Adopted By Substitute (Senate)
- Senate Third Read (Senate)
- Senate Read Second Time (Senate)
- Senate Committee Favorably Reported By Substitute (Senate)
Show full history (10 actions)
- Senate Read and Referred (Senate)
- Senate Hopper (Senate)
Sponsors
- Colton Moore (R, SD-53)
- Jason Anavitarte (R, SD-31)
- Carden Summers (R, SD-13)
- Blake Tillery (R, SD-19)
- Brian Strickland (R, SD-42)
- Steve Gooch (R, SD-51)
- Brandon Beach (R, SD-21)
- Greg Dolezal (R, SD-27)
- Matt Brass (R, SD-6)
- Randy Robertson (R, SD-29)
- Drew Echols (R, SD-49)
- Bo Hatchett (R, SD-50)
- Rick Williams (R, SD-25)
- Clint Dixon (R, SD-45)
- Russ Goodman (R, SD-8)
- Tyler Paul Smith (R, HD-18)
Votes
- Senate voteMarch 6, 2025
33 yea, 23 nay
- Senate voteMarch 6, 2025
33 yea, 23 nay
Topics
- criminal discovery reform
- expert witness rules
- voter privacy
- law enforcement protections
- court procedure