This is аn action by the state to condemn an automobile which was seized after allegedly having been used to. transport methaqualone, a controlled substance. Code Ann. § 79A-807 (e) (1) (Ga. L. 1974, pp. 221, 235; as amended). See generally, Code Ann. § 79A-828 (Ga. L. 1974, pp. 221, 258; 1975, pp. 919, 920; 1979, pp. 879-881). The appeal from the order of condemnation rаises the issues of the constitutionality of the condemnation statute and the sufficiency of the evidence.
1. It is contended that Code Ann. § 79A-828, pursuant to which *265 the vehiсle was condemned, is violative of the due process, equal protection, privileges and immunities, and seizures provisions and clauses of the Georgia and United States Constitutions, in that it “does not provide for notice of hearing, opportunity to be heard, hearing and judicial determination as to the status of said property as contraband, the forfeitability of the same, the condemnability of the same, or the legality of the seizure, holding, and forfeiture prior to thе doing of the same.” It is further argued that the statute provides in effect that said property may be held for at least 40 days without any hearing or opportunity to be heard as to the owner of the property.
In
State of Ga. v. Bailey,
Code Ann. § 79A-828 (b) (4) provides that seizure of property subject to forfeiture may be made without process or warrant if “the chief drug inspeсtor, agents, drug inspectors or police officers as set forth in subsection (b) of this section has probable cause to believe that the propеrty was used or is intended to be used in violation of this Chapter.” Subsection (e) of this statute requires the reporting of the fact of seizure within 10 days to the district attorney, whо has 30 days within which to file a libel for condemnation. It further provides that “[a] copy of said libel shall be served on the owner or lessee, if known, and if the owner or lessee is unknown, notice of such proceedings shall be published once a week for two weeks in the newspaper in which the sheriffs advertisements are published. At the expiration of 30 days after such filing, if no claimant has appeared to defend said libel, the court shall order the disposition of said seized merchandise as provided herein.”
The statute in question in
Bailey,
Both federal and state statutes similar to our statute — many of which having longer periods of delay before the necessity of instituting forfeiture proceedings than ours — have been uрheld against constitutional attacks. See, e.g., United States v. One Motor Yacht, 527 F2d 1112, 1114 (1st Cir. 1975) (12 1/2-month delay); United States v. One 1973 Dodge Van, 416 FSupp. 43 (E. D. Mich. 1976) (6-month delay); United States v. One 1973 Buick Riviera Auto., 560 F2d 897 (8th Cir. 1977) (5-month delay); Kirkland v. State, 340 S2d 1121 (Ala. Civ. App. 1976); State v. A 1971 Datsun,
We conclude, as we did in Bailey, supra, p. 797, that “this statute affords adequate notice and an adequate hearing so аs to comport with due process of law as required by the Federal Constitution and the Georgia Constitution.” We note also that, in the instant case, similarly to Bailey, the fact that the owner of the property sought to be condemned had adequate notice and an opportunity for hearing, is apparent from the facts of his timely filing of a response to the condemnation petition and his presentation of oral testimony at the hearing.
2. There was evidence, though conflicting, that the accomplice, after overhearing appellant Billy Joe Tant, Jr., discussing Quaaludes or “Lemmons” over the telephone, rode with Tant in the latter’s automobile to a prearranged rendezvous point for a sale of a bag of Quaaludes to two state drug enforcement undercover agents. The accomplice testified that, while en route, Tant had placed the paper bag on the passenger seat beside the the aсcomplice, who looked at its contents and saw plastic bags containing white pills engraved “Lemmon 714,” which he identified from previous experiencе as *267 Quaaludes. The pills were sold to the agents, who then arrested Tant and his accomplice and seized Tant’s car. The testimony of the accomplice was corroborated by state’s witness Spradley, an investigator with the sheriffs department, who was backing up the two undercover agents during the arrest and whо testified that there were two persons in Tant’s car and that the pills as above described were in the possession of the agents immediately following the аrrest of the two.
The seized pills were submitted to the State Crime Laboratоry for drug identification, and the report of the crime lab was admitted in evidence. The report described the evidence as “numerous white tablets inscribed ‘Lemmon 714,’ ” and the results were “positive for methaqualone. ”
The above evidence was sufficient to show probable cause to believe that the vehiсle was used in violation of Code Ch. 79A-8, so as to authorize its seizure without process or warrant pursuant to Code Ann. § 79A-828 (b) (4), and to sustain the finding that the vehicle in question had bеen used or intended for use in transporting a controlled substance (methaqualone. 1 Code Ann. § 79A-807 (e) (1)) for the purpose of sale. Code Ann. § 79A-828 (a) (4). Accordingly, the order of condemnation is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Notes
The Physicians’ Desk Reference (33rd Ed., 1979), p. 986, indicates that Quaаlude is the trade name of pills, the generic name of which is methaqualone, which pills are produced by Lemmon Pharmacal Co., are white in color, аnd engraved “Lemmon 714” on the 300-mg. size. It has been held that the generic equivalent of a trade name is not the proper subject of judicial notice.
Elrod v. State,