Moore v. State, 48498
| Citation | 202 S.E.2d 555,130 Ga.App. 184 |
| Decision Date | 11 October 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,No. 48498,48498,2 |
| Parties | Harold T. MOORE et al. v. The STATE |
| Court | United States Court of Appeals (Georgia) |
Gale W. Mull, Atlanta, for appellants.
William H. Ison, Dist. Atty., J. W. Bradley, Jonesboro, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
The defendants were indicted for the unlawful possession of marijuana. Prior to arraignment they moved to suppress certain evidence, which motion was denied. The appeal is from that judgment.
This is another of the many, many cases involving motions to suppress evidence allegedly obtained by illegal search warrants in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The facts shown at the hearing are that the officer arrested a juvenile at a high school for possession of marijuana. The juvenile stated to him that she had received the marijuana from an individual known to her only as Terry, who lived at a named address; that the juvenile had been on the premises and had personally seen a quantity of marijuana and had purchased marijuana. The juvenile informer had never given the officer information before, nor had he ever seen the informer before her arrest.
The affidavit recited that affiant received his information 'from a confidential informer' without showing any reasons for the informer's reliability and specific knowledge as to how the informer obtained the information.
But the magistrate was sworn and submitted evidence at the hearing on motion to suppress as follows: The arresting officer testified to the magistrate at the probable cause hearing that he arrested the informant, a juvenile, who was in possession of marijuana, and who told the officer where and from whom she purchased the marijuana. Defendants then introduced evidence in rebuttal, in form of a transcript of a preliminary hearing in which the arresting officer swore he had given the magistrate only the information contained in the search warrant. Held:
Although the affidavit for search warrant did not contain sufficient facts to justify the issuance of same, the additional evidence submitted at the hearing, although contradicted, was sufficient to authorize its issuance.
In the past this court has been rather restrictive in its decisions on this question, holding that unless the affidavit for warrant itself contained sufficient facts for its issuance, the warrant was invalid. See Terry v. State, 123 Ga.App. 746, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Simmons v. State
...the magistrate. Campbell v. State, 226 Ga. 883, 178 S.E.2d 257; Butler v. State, 130 Ga.App. 469, 470, 203 S.E.2d 558; Moore v. State, 130 Ga.App. 184, 185, 202 S.E.2d 555; Marshall v. State, 113 Ga.App. 143, 147 S.E.2d 666. Such sworn testimony, as here, is permitted to show how the inform......
-
Maddox v. State, 49957
...... 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 ......
-
Luke v. State
...under the rulings in Campbell v. State, 226 Ga. 883, 178 S.E.2d 257; Johnston v. State, 227 Ga. 387, 181 S.E.2d 42, and Moore v. State, 130 Ga.App. 184, 202 S.E.2d 555, to authorize the issuance of the search warrant. The lower court did not err in overruling the motion to suppress the evid......
- Riley v. State, 48206