Partain v. State
| Decision Date | 04 January 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 31558,31558 |
| Citation | 238 Ga. 207,232 S.E.2d 46 |
| Parties | John D. PARTAIN v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Glenn Zell, Atanta, for appellant.
Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., H. Allen Moye, Asst. Dist. Atty., Atlanta, for appellee.
The court granted certiorari in this case to determine whether evidence of a positive laboratory test showing that a substance was an illegal drug is admissible where the defendant has no opportunity to make an independent test. The Court of Appeals held that this evidence was admissible based on its decision in Patterson v. State, 138 Ga.App. 290, 226 S.E.2d 115 (1976).
The evidence shows that the appellant's apartment was searched by the GBI pursuant to a search warrant. The agents found a pair of scales with a white residue on the metal pans. The State Crime Lab analyzed this white residue and found it positive for cocaine. Prior to trial, appellant moved that he be allowed to make an independent analysis of the white substance seized. The motion was granted, but when appellant's expert arrived at the State Crime Lab to make his analysis he was told that there was no longer any contraband for him to test. The pans had contained only enough white residue to perform one analysis, and what little cocaine there was had deteriorated through the analytical process. Despite appellant's inability to perform an independent analysis of the substance, the State Crime Lab's analysis was admitted at trial. He was convicted of violating Georgia's Controlled Substances Act (Code Ann. § 79A-801 et seq.). Appellant contends that this admission violated his due process rights.
We have today overruled the Court of Appeals' holding in Patterson v. State, 138 Ga.App. 290, 226 S.E.2d 115, supra. Patterson v. State, 238 Ga. 204, 232 S.E.2d 233. In that case we held that due process requires that a defendant charged with possession or sale of a prohibited substance be allowed to have his own expert analyze the contraband independently. We found this right to be limited, however. For example, a defendant's request for an independent examination must be timely made, appropriate safeguards for the independent analysis may be imposed by the trial court, and the request must be reasonable. Patterson, 238 Ga. 204, 232 S.E.2d 233.
In the instant case only enough cocaine was seized to perform one test, and it was, of necessity, destroyed in the analytical process. The question we must decide is whether, under these...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Blackwell
...material during testing by the State will not preclude prosecution and admission of the State's test results. In Partain v. State, 238 Ga. 207, 208, 232 S.E.2d 46 (1977), it was concluded that a request for independent testing when the substance had been used up was unreasonable because an ......
-
Emmett v. State
...has been shown in the trial court's ruling that trial could proceed without these items of physical evidence. See Partain v. State, 238 Ga. 207, 232 S.E.2d 46 (1976). Review of the transcript shows that Emmett subsequently waived his initial request for a continuance on this 4. The trial co......
-
Smith v. State
...test is impossible and, thus, admission of the test results does not violate the defendant's due process rights. Partain v. State, 238 Ga. 207, 208, 232 S.E.2d 46 (1977). See also Baker v. State, 250 Ga. 187, 194(2), 297 S.E.2d 9 (1982). Smith conceded that the State did not intentionally "......
-
Rogers v. State, 60211
...weighed." We are urged "to reconsider this problem" that was settled in Partain v. State, 139 Ga.App. 325(5), 228 S.E.2d 292, affd. 238 Ga. 207, 232 S.E.2d 46. Therein we held: "Regardless of the amount, however minute, if it is enough for the officers to recover, as small as it may be, and......