Patterson v. State, No. 31244
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | INGRAM; All the Justices concur, except GUNTER |
| Citation | 238 Ga. 204,232 S.E.2d 233 |
| Docket Number | No. 31244 |
| Decision Date | 04 January 1977 |
| Parties | R. L. PATTERSON v. The STATE. |
Page 233
v.
The STATE.
Rehearing Denied Jan. 27, 1977.
[238 Ga. 207] Albert Horn, Atlanta, for appellant.
Robert F. Oliver, Clarkesville, for appellee.
Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Isaac Byrd, Staff Asst. Atty. Gen., Atlanta, amicus curiae.
[238 Ga. 204] INGRAM, Justice.
This is a drug case with a due process issue that is here on certioari. The question we address is whether the defendant, charged with possession of marijuana, has a right to an independent analysis of the alleged marijuana. The Court of Appeals held that the defendant does not have a right to make an independent analysis.
The defendant was arrested by the GBI in August, 1971, and charged with possession of marijuana in violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act (Code Ann. § 79A-801, et seq.) The State Crime Laboratory received samples of the alleged marijuana during 1971, subjected it to a chemical analysis, and determined that it was marijuana. The evidence was destroyed in February, 1974, pursuant to a routine procedure of the State Crime Laboratory.
In April, 1975, the defendant filed a motion requesting an opportunity to have an independent examination of the evidence, alleging that it was not a proscribed substance within the meaning of Code Ann.
Page 234
§ 79A-802(13). The destruction of the alleged [238 Ga. 205] marijuana by the State Crime Laboratory two months earlier rendered compliance with the defendant's request impossible. In July, 1975, defendant was convicted in Rabun Superior Court of possession of marijuana and sentenced to two years in jail and fined $2,000. A state's witness from the State Crime Laboratory testified at trial that the substance seized from the defendant had been scientifically tested by him and found to be marijuana. The laboratory report was introduced into evidence. In Patterson v. State, 138 Ga.App. 290, 226 S.E.2d 115 (1976), the Court of Appeals affirmed appellant's convictions, holding that his constitutional rights were not violated by an absence of an independent analysis of the alleged marijuana.The constitutional requirement that a criminal defendant be afforded a fair trial and an adequate opportunity to prepare his defense sometimes poses problems in Georgia because of the absence of any meaningful procedure for pretrial discovery in criminal cases. Our sister states of Mississippi and Alabama have held that, notwithstanding the absence of a criminal discovery statute, due process requires that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Blackwell, No. A00A0073.
...testing the urine as provided in the consent order for such testing, destroyed the urine after 12 months. Pursuant to Patterson v. State, 238 Ga. 204, 232 S.E.2d 233 (1977), an accused charged with possession or sale of a prohibited substance is entitled to have an independent examination o......
-
Williams v. State, No. 39641
...for an independent analysis, the trial court may, as a matter of discretion, refuse to permit such an examination." Patterson v. State, 238 Ga. 204(2), 232 S.E.2d 233 a). We do not think that the court erred by failing to expressly permit inspection of fibers relating to the ten extrinsic o......
-
Com. v. Ortiz
...21 L.Ed.2d 101 (1968); 2 Patterson v. State, 133 Ga.App. 742, 212 S.E.2d 858 (1975), aff'd, 138 Ga.App. 290, 226 S.E.2d 115 (1976), and 238 Ga. 204, 232 S.E.2d 233 (1977); Commonwealth v. Hernley, 216 Pa.Super. 177, 263 A.2d 904 (1970), cert. denied 401 U.S. 914, 91 S.Ct. 886, 27 L.Ed.2d 81......
-
Park v. State, No. A97A2412
...1 248 Ga. 10, 16-18(6), 282 S.E.2d 61 (1981), overruled on other grounds, Rower v. State, 264 Ga. 323, 325(5), 443 S.E.2d 839 (1994). 2 238 Ga. 204, 232 S.E.2d 233 (1977). 3 White v. Maggio, 556 F.2d 1352, 1356-1358 (5th Cir.1977) (inspection of bullets); United States v. Herndon, 536 F.2d ......
-
State v. Blackwell, No. A00A0073.
...testing the urine as provided in the consent order for such testing, destroyed the urine after 12 months. Pursuant to Patterson v. State, 238 Ga. 204, 232 S.E.2d 233 (1977), an accused charged with possession or sale of a prohibited substance is entitled to have an independent examination o......
-
Williams v. State, No. 39641
...for an independent analysis, the trial court may, as a matter of discretion, refuse to permit such an examination." Patterson v. State, 238 Ga. 204(2), 232 S.E.2d 233 a). We do not think that the court erred by failing to expressly permit inspection of fibers relating to the ten extrinsic o......
-
Com. v. Ortiz
...21 L.Ed.2d 101 (1968); 2 Patterson v. State, 133 Ga.App. 742, 212 S.E.2d 858 (1975), aff'd, 138 Ga.App. 290, 226 S.E.2d 115 (1976), and 238 Ga. 204, 232 S.E.2d 233 (1977); Commonwealth v. Hernley, 216 Pa.Super. 177, 263 A.2d 904 (1970), cert. denied 401 U.S. 914, 91 S.Ct. 886, 27 L.Ed.2d 81......
-
Park v. State, No. A97A2412
...1 248 Ga. 10, 16-18(6), 282 S.E.2d 61 (1981), overruled on other grounds, Rower v. State, 264 Ga. 323, 325(5), 443 S.E.2d 839 (1994). 2 238 Ga. 204, 232 S.E.2d 233 (1977). 3 White v. Maggio, 556 F.2d 1352, 1356-1358 (5th Cir.1977) (inspection of bullets); United States v. Herndon, 536 F.2d ......