Rains v. State
| Citation | 161 Ga.App. 361,288 S.E.2d 626 |
| Decision Date | 19 February 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 63465,63465 |
| Parties | RAINS v. The STATE. |
| Court | United States Court of Appeals (Georgia) |
William Ralph Hill, Jr., LaFayette, for appellant.
D. L. Lomenick, Dist. Atty., LaFayette, for appellee.
The defendant appeals his conviction for unlawful possession of marijuana and methaqualone. His primary contentions are that he was the victim of an illegal search and seizure and that the evidence was insufficient to establish his possession of the contraband.
The defendant was arrested on the night of May 21, 1980, after the sheriff's office received a call for assistance on behalf of Diedre Cate, his live-in girlfriend. A sheriff's deputy encountered Ms. Cate at a residence on the road to the defendant's house. She was bleeding from the forehead and side and reported that the defendant had beaten and shot her. Based on this information, a justice of the peace was summoned to the scene, and the deputy swore out a warrant for the defendant's arrest on the charge of aggravated assault. The defendant was subsequently arrested in his house a short distance away, where, according to the deputy, he was seated at the top of the stairway to the second floor, "[k]ind of in a stupor ... just staring at the stairwell, and had a shotgun laying on his lap with the hammer cocked." The contraband was found in plain view inside an open briefcase on the floor approximately three feet away. Held :
1. From the location of the contraband in relation to the defendant and his condition at the time of his arrest, a rational trier of fact could reasonably have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was in knowing possession of the contraband. See generally Crawford v. State, 245 Ga. 89(1), 263 S.E.2d 131 (1980).
2. The motion to suppress was based on a contention that the arrest warrant was invalid because the justice of the peace who issued it was not neutral and detached. We find no evidence to support this contention. The fact that the magistrate drove to the scene rather than requiring the deputy to come to him did not in and of itself constitute such an involvement in law enforcement activities on his part as to destroy his neutrality, nor was his neutrality compromised by the fact that he waited outside the defendant's house after issuing the warrant in order to observe the anticipated siege. The cases relied upon by the defendant are inapposite. In Thomason v. State, 148 Ga.App. 513, 251 S.E.2d 598 (1978), the magistrate was not merely present on the scene while the warrant was being executed, he drove some of the officers there and conferred with them during the search. In Baggett v. State, 132 Ga.App. 266, 208 S.E.2d 23 (1974), a per se rule of disqualification was applied where the magistrate was a part-time radio dispatcher for city officers, including police.
We also reject the defendant's contention that the justice of the peace was disqualified because of his testimony that he received his warrant applications from the county at no cost. This fact could not reasonably have given him a vested interest in issuing warrants. Compare Connally v. Georgia, 429 U.S. 245, 97 S.Ct. 546, 50 L.Ed.2d 444 (1977). See also Gordon v. State, 150 Ga. 862(1), 258 S.E.2d 664 (1979).
3. The trial court erred in admitting the arrest warrant as evidence. Its contents were relevant to no issue in the case, there being no dispute as to the manner of or reasons for its issuance. Cf. Smith v. State, 156 Ga.App. 102, 273 S.E.2d 918 (1980). However, the error was harmless as a matter of law. The only potentially prejudicial information contained in the document was the following allegation in the deputy's affidavit: "On information received from Diedre Cate subject did shoot her with a .410-gauge sawed-off shotgun." The affiant testified at trial that he had obtained the warrant on the basis of Ms. Cate's statement that the defendant shot her. The only thing added by the affidavit was an allegation as to the type of weapon used. In the context of all the evidence presented at trial, which included testimony that the defendant was holding a .410-gauge shotgun when arrested, it is "highly probable" that the reception of the written warrant as evidence did not contribute to the verdict. See generally Johnson v. State, 238 Ga. 59, 230 S.E.2d 869 (1976).
4. The testimony concerning the aggravated assault charge was not inadmissible over the objection that it placed the defendant's character in issue by showing the commission of a separate, independent offense. "[W]here evidence is relevant for the purpose of showing the circumstance of the arrest, it will not be excluded because it incidentally shows the commission of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lockett v. State
...there for some time does not abdicate his proper position. Pressel v. State, 163 Ga.App. 188, 292 S.E.2d 553, 556 (1982); see also Rains, 288 S.E.2d at 628; LaFave Search and Seizure Sec. 4.2(d) (2d ed....
-
Johnson v. State
...748(5), 305 S.E.2d 372 (1983), rev'd on other grounds, State v. Hightower, 252 Ga. 220, 312 S.E.2d 610 (1984); Rains v. State, 161 Ga.App. 361, 362(3), 288 S.E.2d 626 (1982). Judgment SMITH, J., and HAROLD R. BANKE, Senior Appellate Judge, concur. ...
-
Perkins v. State, A89A1604
...inapplicable under the facts in evidence. [Cits.]" Keller v. State, 245 Ga. 522(1), 265 S.E.2d 813 (1980). Accord Rains v. State, 161 Ga.App. 361(7), 288 S.E.2d 626 (1982). Moreover, although the trial judge read from the title of the code section referring to elements of the offense not in......
-
Moore v. State, 65416
...to show the circumstances of appellant's arrest. See State v. Luke, 232 Ga. 815, 816, 209 S.E.2d 165 (1974); Rains v. State, 161 Ga.App. 361, 362(4), 288 S.E.2d 626 (1982). 2. Appellant moved for a mistrial in response to testimony by a police officer concerning his investigation of the cas......