What is O.C.G.A. § 35-3-37.1 and how does it apply to mugshot websites in Georgia?

O.C.G.A. § 35-3-37.1 is Georgia's mugshot website removal statute, enacted in response to the growth of commercial websites that post booking photographs and in some cases charge fees for their removal. The statute establishes a formal process: eligible individuals must first obtain criminal history record restriction through the GCIC, then send a written removal demand to the website operator. Once the demand is served, the website has 30 days to remove the photograph. Websites that refuse to comply face civil liability under the statute. The Georgia Attorney General's Office and the Georgia Justice Project both provide guidance on navigating this process, though eligibility depends entirely on the outcome of the underlying criminal case.

What case outcomes qualify a person for mugshot removal in Georgia?

Georgia law limits mugshot removal eligibility to three qualifying outcomes under O.C.G.A. § 35-3-37. First, a complete dismissal of all charges — whether before or after formal accusation or indictment — entitles a defendant to seek record restriction and mugshot removal. A partial dismissal where any conviction remains does not qualify. Second, a complete acquittal on all charges at trial qualifies; an acquittal on some counts with a conviction on others does not. Third, sentencing under a record-restricting mechanism qualifies — specifically the First Offender Act (O.C.G.A. § 42-8-60) for eligible offenses, or conditional discharge under O.C.G.A. § 16-13-2 for drug possession offenses. A standard probated conviction, a nolo contendere plea resulting in conviction, or a nolle prosequi later re-filed does not qualify.

Why does the way a criminal case is resolved affect a person's ability to get their mugshot removed?

The resolution of a criminal case directly determines whether a defendant is eligible for the record restriction that is required before a mugshot removal demand can be made. A defendant who accepts a standard probated plea — even with no jail time — does not qualify for record restriction and cannot compel mugshot removal under O.C.G.A. § 35-3-37.1. By contrast, a defendant whose case is dismissed, who is acquitted at trial, or who is sentenced under the First Offender Act or conditional discharge is entitled to both record restriction and mugshot removal. This makes the manner of case resolution a critical consideration in defense strategy, particularly for first-time defendants for whom the long-term reputational impact of a visible arrest record may outweigh the immediate criminal penalty.

How can Brett Willis Law LLC help with mugshot removal in Georgia?

Brett Willis Law LLC represents clients throughout Gainesville, Hall County, and North Georgia who are seeking to protect their reputation after a Georgia arrest. Award-winning attorney Brett Willis — named to The Fulton County Daily Report's 10 Lawyers You Need to Know, recognized as a Harvard Law School Trial Advocacy Program Instructor, and rated by Super Lawyers — understands that how a case is resolved has consequences that extend far beyond the courtroom. The firm advises clients on the record restriction and mugshot removal implications of every potential case outcome, and pursues the resolutions — dismissal, acquittal, First Offender treatment, or conditional discharge — that position clients to have their arrest photograph removed from the internet. Contact Brett Willis Law LLC for a free consultation.

How Can a Person Get Their Mugshot Removed from an Online Mugshot Website in Georgia?

An arrest — regardless of whether it results in a conviction — can leave a lasting and damaging digital footprint. Before the internet, a person’s criminal history was a relatively contained document accessed only through formal background check processes. Today, arrest photographs are routinely posted on commercial mugshot websites that aggregate booking information from county jails and make it searchable by name. The result is that a person’s mugshot can appear in the first page of Google search results for years — affecting job applications, professional licensing, housing, and personal relationships — even if the charges were dismissed or the person was never convicted of any crime.

Georgia law provides specific statutory mechanisms to compel the removal of arrest photographs from commercial mugshot websites, but the right to compel removal is conditioned on the outcome of the underlying criminal case. Understanding what outcomes qualify, and what steps are required, is essential for anyone seeking to protect their reputation after a Georgia arrest.

The Legal Framework: O.C.G.A. § 35-3-37.1

Georgia’s mugshot website removal statute, O.C.G.A. § 35-3-37.1, was enacted in response to the proliferation of commercial mugshot websites that post arrest photographs and in some cases charge fees for removal. The statute establishes a process by which eligible individuals may demand that these websites remove their arrest photograph, and it creates civil liability for non-compliant websites.

The statute requires the individual seeking removal to obtain a ‘criminal history record restriction’ through the Georgia Crime Information Center (GCIC) — part of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation — before demanding removal from the mugshot website. Once record restriction has been obtained, the individual may send a written removal demand to the website operator, which is then required to remove the photograph within 30 days. Failure to comply exposes the website to civil liability.

The Georgia Attorney General’s Office has published guidance on this process, and the Georgia Justice Project provides practical assistance to individuals seeking to navigate it. However, the threshold requirement — record restriction — depends entirely on the outcome of the underlying criminal case.

Three Qualifying Outcomes for Mugshot Removal

Georgia law limits the right to compel mugshot removal to persons whose cases fall within one of three qualifying categories. These categories correspond to the three circumstances under which record restriction is available under O.C.G.A. § 35-3-37.

The first qualifying outcome is dismissal of all charges. Whether the dismissal occurred before the case was formally accused (indicted or accusation filed) or after indictment or accusation, a complete dismissal of all charges entitles the defendant to seek record restriction and, following restriction, to demand removal of their arrest photograph from mugshot websites. A partial dismissal — where some charges are dismissed but the defendant is convicted of others — does not qualify.

The second qualifying outcome is a complete acquittal. A defendant who is found not guilty of all charges at a jury trial or bench trial is entitled to record restriction and mugshot removal. An acquittal on some counts with a conviction on others does not qualify.

The third qualifying outcome is record restriction imposed at the time of sentencing or following completion of sentence under either the First Offender Act (O.C.G.A. § 42-8-60) or conditional discharge for drug offenses (O.C.G.A. § 16-13-2). Under the First Offender Act, record restriction is available for all qualifying offenses. Conditional discharge record restriction is available only for drug possession offenses. A standard probated sentence — one that does not involve First Offender or conditional discharge treatment — does not result in record restriction and does not qualify for mugshot removal.

What Does Not Qualify

Several common case outcomes do not entitle a defendant to record restriction or mugshot removal. A guilty plea resulting in a standard conviction — even one with no jail time and a short probationary sentence — does not qualify. A nolo contendere (no contest) plea that results in a conviction does not qualify. A nolle prosequi that is later re-filed does not constitute a final dismissal for restriction purposes. And a conviction that is later overturned on appeal and remanded for retrial does not, by itself, qualify — the case must ultimately be dismissed or result in an acquittal.

For defendants whose cases have already been resolved through a standard conviction, the path to record restriction is more limited and typically requires post-conviction relief through the courts rather than administrative petition.

The Practical Importance of Case Outcome in Defense Strategy

The eligibility rules for mugshot removal are one of the most practical reasons why the manner in which a criminal case is resolved matters enormously. A defendant who accepts a standard probated plea — thinking they have avoided serious consequences because they received no jail time — may not realize that their arrest photograph will remain publicly accessible and searchable by name for the indefinite future. By contrast, a defendant who achieves a dismissal through pretrial diversion, an acquittal at trial, or a First Offender discharge is entitled to both record restriction and mugshot removal.

Defense counsel should discuss the record restriction and mugshot removal implications of every potential case resolution with clients, particularly first-time defendants for whom the long-term reputational consequences of a visible arrest record may be as significant as the immediate criminal penalty.

Brett and his team were beyond supportive, helpful, gracious, caring and knowledgeable! We went through the most challenging and difficult time in our life and he was there every step of the way. With results we could never have imagined but definitely prayed for.

Not to mention his level of professionalism. From the first time we spoke to the first time we saw him in court. He stood out from almost every other attorney there. We were so appreciative that our attorney looked and was so professional, pulled together and prepared. When so many others were none of these things.

Thank you just doesn’t seem like enough to convey our feelings and appreciation.

Karen L.

I tried to write this several times and it brought me to tears. First may I say this has been the hardest three years of my life. Five lawyers I interviewed and none even understood the law as it applied to my case. So I thought I would try one more and it was Brett. From our first conversation together I knew he understood the law and was the perfect one for the case. I want to say how he prepared the case and presented it, achieving a full dismissal and ruling the police violated my first amendment rights. Complete genius!!!!

If you're reading this review and unsure, stop...call Brett. He always returned my call or texts within a couple hours, never more than 24 hours. He was always courteous and knowledgeable, trust me he talked me off the ledge a couple times. I would have given him 10 stars but 5 was the only option. Thank you Brett for all you did for me!!!!!