Branch v. State, 37566
| Decision Date | 14 October 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 37566,37566 |
| Parties | BRANCH v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
William S. Stone, Stone & Stone, Blakely, for James Edward Branch.
Charles M. Ferguson, Dist. Atty., Cuthbert, for State.
Appellant was convicted for possession of more than one ounce of marijuana and sentenced to serve four years and 11 months in the state penitentiary. He directs his appeal to this court on the constitutional question of whether a judge of a recorder's court of a municipality has the authority to issue a search warrant for an alleged violation of a state law. He enumerates three other alleged errors.
1. The evidence upon which appellant was convicted was obtained by the state during the search of the appellant's automobile. Appellant moved to suppress all of the evidence on the grounds that the recorder's court judge did not constitutionally have jurisdiction to issue the search warrant. His motion was denied.
The cases cited by appellant deal with the jurisdiction of municipal courts to try cases involving alleged offenses against the state, and not with the authority to issue warrants.
Article VI, Section I, Paragraph I (Code Ann. § 2-3001) provides: "The judicial powers of this state shall be vested in a Supreme Court, a Court of Appeals, Superior Court, Probate Courts, Justice of the Peace, and such other courts as have been or may be established by law. (Emphasis added). Code Ann. § 27-303 provides that "any judicial officer authorized to hold a court of inquiry to examine into an arrest of an offender against the penal laws ... may issue a search warrant ..." Code Ann. § 27-401 provides that "any judge of the superior or county court, or justice of the peace, or city or town officer, who may be an ex-officio justice of the peace, may hold a court of inquiry...." Code Ann. § 69-705 provides that "all police court recorders and judges of all recorders' courts in this State shall have and are hereby given the same powers and authorities as ex-officio justices of the peace in the matter of and pertaining to criminal cases of whatever nature in the several courts of this State."
Appellant argues further that the attempt by the General Assembly to authorize mayors and recorders to exercise the powers of ex officio justices of the peace is unconstitutional in violation of Art. VI, Sec. VIII, Par. I (Code Ann. § 2-3701) because it has the effect of creating a multiplicity of ex officio justices of the peace in a militia district where the constitution specifies that the number of such officers shall not exceed one per district. While not ruling directly on that point, in Bush, Justice of the Peace v. Wilcox, Judge, 223 Ga. 89, 153 S.E.2d 701 (1967) we affirmed the authority of a judge of a small claims court to issue an arrest warrant and hold committal hearings in the same jurisdiction as the challenging justice of the peace.
Appellant has demonstrated no conflict between the statutes and the constitution and the trial court did not err in denying his motion to suppress.
2. Appellant contends that in ruling on his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Strozier v. State
...in the context of informer-witnesses and informer-participants). 15. Thornton, 238 Ga. at 165(2), 231 S.E.2d 729; see Branch v. State, 248 Ga. 300, 301(2), 282 S.E.2d 894 (1981) (recognizing that Thornton “held that when the trial court initially determines that the informer was merely a ti......
-
Moore v. State
...v. State, 243 Ga. 373, 396, 254 S.E.2d 337 (pure tipster who had neither participated in nor witnessed the offense); Branch v. State, 248 Ga. 300, 301, 282 S.E.2d 894 (merely a tipster where not paid, took no part in offense, and not present at time of offense); see also Johnson v. State, 1......
-
Villegas v. State
...appears to be a mere tipster who had neither seen nor participated in the events, disclosure was not required. Branch v. State, 248 Ga. 300, 301(2), 282 S.E.2d 894 (1981). Moreover, neither Villegas' former nor present gang membership was a relevant inquiry, since it was not an element of a......
-
Bolt v. State
...231 S.E.2d 729 (1977) (illustrating differences between an informer-participant, informer-witness and mere tipster); Branch v. State, 248 Ga. 300(2), 282 S.E.2d 894 (1981) (informer who was not paid for information, who took no part in offense and was not present at time of offense was mere......