Holbrook v. State, 70696
| Court | United States Court of Appeals (Georgia) |
| Writing for the Court | BENHAM; BANKE, C.J., McMURRAY, P.J., and CARLEY; McMURRAY; I am authorized to state that BANKE C.J., and CARLEY |
| Citation | 177 Ga.App. 318,339 S.E.2d 346 |
| Parties | HOLBROOK et al. v. The STATE. |
| Docket Number | No. 70696,70696 |
| Decision Date | 03 December 1985 |
Page 346
v.
The STATE.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 19, 1985.
Certiorari Denied Feb. 19, 1986.
Page 347
[177 Ga.App. 323] Harold N. Wollstein, Rome, for appellants.
Jacques O. Partain III, Dist. Atty., Steven M. Harrison, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
[177 Ga.App. 318] BENHAM, Judge.
Appellant Hubert Holbrook and his son Gary appeal from their convictions for possessing cocaine and marijuana with intent to distribute. [177 Ga.App. 319] They question the sufficiency of the evidence presented against them and enumerate as error the denial of their motion to suppress.
1. A Dalton police officer received a report of suspicious behavior on the part of appellant Hubert Holbrook from one of the desk clerks at the motel where appellants were registered guests. The police officer computer-checked the license plate numbers of appellants' cars and found one tag not on file and the other not registered to appellants. Noting the Floyd County stickers on the license plates, the officer contacted the Rome police and was told to use caution in approaching appellants; that they might be involved in drug trafficking; that Hubert Holbrook was known to carry a weapon and was considered a dangerous man. The officer was also told that Hubert Holbrook had two sons, one of whom was an escapee from the Georgia State Prison at Reidsville. A detective called the FBI and was told the Holbrooks were frequent drug traffickers and that Russell Holbrook, Hubert's son and Gary's brother, was a Reidsville escapee. The officers who later conducted the roadblock were told by their superior that Russell, the escapee, was at the motel with his father and brother and a bank robbery might be in the offing. Two detectives surveilled the motel to maintain the status quo until the information concerning Russell could be confirmed. However, when the desk clerk reported to police that appellants were checking out of the motel, the police set up a roadblock at the motel exit. The first auto stopped was driven by appellant Gary Holbrook, who was asked to exit the car and sit in a patrol car for his protection. His automobile was hidden so as not to arouse the suspicions of the elder Holbrook, who was approaching the roadblock. Hubert Holbrook was stopped when he reached the roadblock, and a .38 revolver was seen between the driver's seat and door when he exited the car at police request. A search of his car revealed cocaine and a cocaine analysis kit. Currency found in Gary's possession also contained traces of cocaine.
Having discerned that Gary Holbrook, the driver of the first car, was not the Holbrook son who had escaped from prison, the police had no reason to detain him further. However, in light of the police reports that the Holbrooks were armed and dangerous and the fact that a weapon had been found in the other Holbrook car, police conducted a weapons search of Gary's automobile before returning it to him. Spoons with a white powdery residue and syringes were discovered in a grocery bag on the floorboard. A more extensive search uncovered hashish.
Appellants argue that the police were not authorized to stop the Holbrook vehicles and make the warrantless searches which uncovered the contraband and paraphernalia that led to the charges against appellants. We disagree with appellants' position.
[177 Ga.App. 320] "A police officer is authorized to make a brief, investigatory detention of an individual for the purpose of maintaining the status quo and obtaining information, provided he can point to specific and articulable facts which, together with rational inferences drawn therefrom, reasonably warrant
Page 348
such an intrusion. See Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (88 SC [S.Ct.] 1868, 20 LE2d [L.Ed.2d] 889) (1968). [Cits.] 'What is demanded of the police officer, as the agent of the state, is a founded suspicion, some necessary basis from which the court can determine that the detention was not arbitrary or harassing.' [Cit.]" Smith v. State, 165 Ga.App. 333(1), 299 S.E.2d 891 (1983). However, "[t]he Fourth Amendment does not require a policeman who lacks the precise level of information necessary for probable cause to arrest to simply shrug his shoulders and allow a crime to occur or a criminal to escape. On the contrary, Terry recognizes that it may be the essence of good police work to adopt an intermediate response ... A brief stop of a suspicious individual, in order to determine his identity or to maintain the status quo momentarily while obtaining more information, may be most reasonable in light of the facts known to the officer at the time. [Cit.]" Stiggers v. State, 151 Ga.App. 546, 547, 260 S.E.2d 413...To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Loring v. Bellsouth Advertising & Pub. Corp., 70673
...No. 70673. Court of Appeals of Georgia. Dec. 5, 1985. Rehearing Denied Dec. 19, 1985. Certiorari Denied Jan. 29, 1986. Page 373 [177 Ga.App. 318] Ralph S. Goldberg, Atlanta, for R. Phillip Shinall III, Decatur, for appellee. [177 Ga.App. 307] SOGNIER, Judge. Gene Loring, d/b/a Christopher's......
-
Clark v. State, A00A0965.
...by two people contained four pounds of marijuana, nine grams of crack cocaine, a handgun, and drug paraphernalia); Holbrook v. State, 177 Ga. App. 318, 321(2), 339 S.E.2d 346 (1985) (distribution finding authorized where search revealed ten grams of cocaine, two chunks of hashish, four spoo......
-
Brimer v. State, A91A1587
...to a conclusion that the roadblock was an unreasonable intrusion upon citizens traveling that public roadway. See Holbrook v. State, 177 Ga.App. 318, 320, 339 S.E.2d 346; see Griggs v. State, 167 Ga.App. 581(1), 307 S.E.2d 75. We have held an organized and non-discriminate road check to be ......
-
Anderson v. State, A97A0217
...spoons, or the division of cocaine into multiple packets, recovered and offered into evidence. Compare Holbrook v. State, 177 Ga.App. 318, 321(2), 339 S.E.2d 346 The State's scant circumstantial evidence was not sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis except Anderson's guilt, such......
-
Loring v. Bellsouth Advertising & Pub. Corp., 70673
...No. 70673. Court of Appeals of Georgia. Dec. 5, 1985. Rehearing Denied Dec. 19, 1985. Certiorari Denied Jan. 29, 1986. Page 373 [177 Ga.App. 318] Ralph S. Goldberg, Atlanta, for R. Phillip Shinall III, Decatur, for appellee. [177 Ga.App. 307] SOGNIER, Judge. Gene Loring, d/b/a Christopher's......
-
Clark v. State, A00A0965.
...by two people contained four pounds of marijuana, nine grams of crack cocaine, a handgun, and drug paraphernalia); Holbrook v. State, 177 Ga. App. 318, 321(2), 339 S.E.2d 346 (1985) (distribution finding authorized where search revealed ten grams of cocaine, two chunks of hashish, four spoo......
-
Brimer v. State, A91A1587
...to a conclusion that the roadblock was an unreasonable intrusion upon citizens traveling that public roadway. See Holbrook v. State, 177 Ga.App. 318, 320, 339 S.E.2d 346; see Griggs v. State, 167 Ga.App. 581(1), 307 S.E.2d 75. We have held an organized and non-discriminate road check to be ......
-
Anderson v. State, A97A0217
...spoons, or the division of cocaine into multiple packets, recovered and offered into evidence. Compare Holbrook v. State, 177 Ga.App. 318, 321(2), 339 S.E.2d 346 The State's scant circumstantial evidence was not sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis except Anderson's guilt, such......