Lee v. State

• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: HALL
• Citation: Lee v. State, 184 S.E.2d 41, 124 Ga.App. 397 (Ga. App. 1971)
• Decision Date: 08 September 1971
• Docket Number: No. 46281,No. 3,46281,3
• Parties: James E. LEE, Jr. v. The STATE

Page 41

184 S.E.2d 41

124 Ga.App. 397

James E. LEE, Jr. v. The STATE.

No. 46281.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No. 3.

Sept. 8, 1971.

Glenn Zell, Atlanta, for appellant.

Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., Carter Goode, Joel M. Feldman, Creighton W. Sossomon, Atlanta, for appellee.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court

HALL, Presiding Judge.

Defendant appeals from the revocation of his probation. His probated sentence followed a conviction for possessing marijuana. The two grounds of the revocation were possession of marijuana and failure to be of general good behavior in that he threatened the life of a police officer. Defendant attacks the latter ground, contending that the condition of probation calling for 'general good behavior' is unconstitutionally vague. However, there is no need to reach this point since the first ground is sufficient to authorize the order of revocation if there was competent evidence to support the finding of possession. Tidwell v. State, 76 Ga.App. 711, 47 S.E.2d 76; Poss v. State, 114 Ga.App. 609, 152 S.E.2d 695.

Defendant's house was searched under a warrant by police officers who found quantities of narcotics and marijuana. The sole issue is whether this evidence should have been suppressed because there was insufficient probable cause for the issuance of the search warrant. The following facts were presented by the investigator to the issuing magistrate both by typed affidavit and supplementary oral testimony: The officer received information from a citizen (named in the affidavit) that he had observed defendant drive up to his employer's door the previous evening and deposit a bag through the mail slot; that this citizen furnished the police with a description of the driver and the tag number of the car; that the bag found under the mail slot contained marijuana; that the auto was registered in defendant's name; that the officer personally knew defendant and the furnished description fit him; that defendant had a previous narcotics record; and that he had intimated to another police officer that he was still using drugs.

Under the approved tests, these facts constituted sufficient probable cause for the issuance of a warrant to search defendant's house for narcotics. Peters v. State, 114 Ga.App. 595, 152 S.E.2d 647; Strauss v. Stynchcombe, 224 Ga. 859, 165 S.E.2d 302.

Defendant contends the affidavit contained false swearing because it stated that the citizen observed defendant drop the bag through the slot when...