Maddox v. State, No. 49957

CourtUnited States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
Writing for the CourtJames E. McDonald, Jr., Athens; QUILLIAN; PANNELL, P.J., and CLARK
Citation213 S.E.2d 1,133 Ga.App. 709
PartiesRobert D. MADDOX v. The STATE
Decision Date14 January 1975
Docket NumberNo. 2,No. 49957

Page 1

213 S.E.2d 1
133 Ga.App. 709
Robert D. MADDOX
v.
The STATE.
No. 49957.
Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No. 2.
Jan. 14, 1975.

Page 2

[133 Ga.App. 711] James E. McDonald, Jr., Athens, J. Roger Thompson, Atlanta, for appellant.

Nat Hancock, Dist. Atty., Jefferson, for appellee.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court

[133 Ga.App. 709] QUILLIAN, Judge.

The defendant was indicted, tried and convicted for theft by receiving stolen property. In conformity with the jury verdict he was sentenced to 7 years. Appeal was taken from that judgment.

The defendant filed a motion to suppress certain physical evidence, which evidence consisted of a 1969 Dodge Charger motor with which he was charged as illegally receiving. This motion duly came on for hearing prior to trial and was overruled. Held:

The defendant contends it was error to overrule his written motion to suppress. The evidence sought to be suppressed was a 1969 Dodge Charger motor which was unlawfully received by the defendant. The physical evidence was obtained by means of a search warrant. We [133 Ga.App. 710] therefore test such warrants against the standards set forth by our Constitution, the Federal Constitution and the cases in this regard.

The magistrate in considering whether to issue a search warrant may consider both the affidavit and oral testimony as to probable cause. Marshall v. State, 113 Ga.App. 143, 145, 147 S.E.2d 666; Hawkins v. State, 130 Ga.App. 426, 203 S.E.2d 622. However, in considering matter other than that contained in the affidavit, such proof must be under oath or affirmation. Art. I, Sec. I, Par. XVI of the Georgia Constitution of 1945 (Code Ann. § 2-116). See Gilliam v. State, 124 Ga.App. 843, 186 S.E.2d 290; Moore v. State, 130 Ga.App. 184, 202 S.E.2d 555. See also Bell v. State, 128 Ga.App. 426, 428, 196 S.E.2d 894.

In the instant case the officer who gave the affidavit stated that no other sworn testimony was given to the trial judge. He reiterated this fact on at least 2 occasions. He did state that he had talked with the issuing magistrate prior to the hearing but, of course, any communications of this nature could not be considered by this court in testing the evidence before the issuing magistrate at the time of the hearing. We therefore consider only the affidavit. See Lewis v. State, 126 Ga.App. 123, 127, 190 S.E.2d 123.

The affidavit given in support of the search warrant recites: 'On 1-29-74 affiant raided a club which Robert Maddox is a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • State v. Farmer, No. 70668
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • 20 Noviembre 1985
    ...a search warrant, the magistrate may consider both the affidavit and oral testimony under oath as to probable cause. Maddox v. State, 133 Ga.App. 709, 710, 213 S.E.2d 1 1. At issue is whether the affidavit is insufficient as a matter of federal constitutional law to establish the probable c......
  • Riggins v. State, No. 50989
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • 22 Octubre 1975
    ...the issuing magistrate to indicate what he relied on in addition to the affidavit as establishing probable cause. Maddox v. State, 133 Ga.App. 709, 710, 213 S.E.2d 1. The issuance of a search warrant is a judicial function and requires that the magistrate be satisfied that probable cause ex......
  • State v. Mincey, No. 66583
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 9 Septiembre 1983
    ...89; Reddish v. State, 161 Ga.App. 170, 288 S.E.2d 266. However, the supporting parol evidence must be under oath. Maddox v. State, 133 Ga.App. 709, 710, 213 S.E.2d 1; Riggins v. State, 136 Ga.App. 279, 281, 220 S.E.2d 775. Thus, even if we consider parol evidence, this record fails to revea......
  • McCannon v. State, No. 63214
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • 24 Febrero 1982
    ...the recovery of stolen property. The court did not err in denying the motion. The affidavit meets the test set out in Maddox v. State, 133 Ga.App. 709, 711, 213 S.E.2d 1. The reasons for the reliability of the informant are stated. The information that there were unaffixed VIN plates was ba......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • State v. Farmer, No. 70668
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • 20 Noviembre 1985
    ...a search warrant, the magistrate may consider both the affidavit and oral testimony under oath as to probable cause. Maddox v. State, 133 Ga.App. 709, 710, 213 S.E.2d 1 1. At issue is whether the affidavit is insufficient as a matter of federal constitutional law to establish the probable c......
  • Riggins v. State, No. 50989
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • 22 Octubre 1975
    ...the issuing magistrate to indicate what he relied on in addition to the affidavit as establishing probable cause. Maddox v. State, 133 Ga.App. 709, 710, 213 S.E.2d 1. The issuance of a search warrant is a judicial function and requires that the magistrate be satisfied that probable cause ex......
  • State v. Mincey, No. 66583
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 9 Septiembre 1983
    ...89; Reddish v. State, 161 Ga.App. 170, 288 S.E.2d 266. However, the supporting parol evidence must be under oath. Maddox v. State, 133 Ga.App. 709, 710, 213 S.E.2d 1; Riggins v. State, 136 Ga.App. 279, 281, 220 S.E.2d 775. Thus, even if we consider parol evidence, this record fails to revea......
  • McCannon v. State, No. 63214
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • 24 Febrero 1982
    ...the recovery of stolen property. The court did not err in denying the motion. The affidavit meets the test set out in Maddox v. State, 133 Ga.App. 709, 711, 213 S.E.2d 1. The reasons for the reliability of the informant are stated. The information that there were unaffixed VIN plates was ba......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT