Reeves v. State, A90A1228
| Decision Date | 28 September 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. A90A1228,A90A1228 |
| Citation | 397 S.E.2d 601,197 Ga.App. 107 |
| Parties | REEVES v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
The Garland Firm, Donald F. Samuel, Atlanta, for appellant.
Tommy K. Floyd, Dist. Atty., Thomas R. McBerry, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Defendant was charged via indictment with two counts of child molestation and one count of aggravated assault. Upon the trial of the case, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty as to Count 1 of the indictment, charging the offense of child molestation, and guilty of the remaining charges of child molestation (Count 2) and of aggravated assault (Count 3). Defendant appeals and enumerates as error the denial of his motion to suppress and the denial of his motion for directed verdict as to the offense charged in Count 1 of the indictment.
Held:
1. The motion to suppress sought to exclude evidence found during a search of defendant's home. Defendant concedes that the search warrant affidavit provides ample probable cause to believe that he molested the victim and that knives had been used to threaten the child. However, defendant contends that there was no basis upon which to believe the knives were on the premises sought to be searched. It is true that the affidavit, which was the sole basis for the search warrant since no further evidence was provided to the magistrate, does not mention the knives in connection with defendant's home. Indeed, the affidavit does not reveal where the alleged acts of child molestation occurred.
Nonetheless, under appropriate circumstances it is reasonable to infer that items will be found in a specific place. Regardless of where the alleged acts of child molestation occurred it is reasonable to expect that defendant would thereafter go to his home taking the knives with him and that he would then leave the knives there. Such an inference is no more than a recognition of the continuing utility of the knives and of the fact that since possession of the knives was not illegal, there being no evidence showing possession being illegal, there would be no reluctance anticipated to holding them at the location where most personal items are stored, that is, at one's home. There was probable cause for issuance of the warrant. Murphy v. State, 238 Ga. 725, 726(1), 727, 728, 234 S.E.2d 911.
Defendant's reliance upon Kelleher v. State, 185 Ga.App. 774, 777(1), 365 S.E.2d 889, is unfounded. This two-judge case is not binding precedent and is also distinguishable on the facts since it involved contraband.
Nor was there any lack of probable cause due to staleness. While there had been an 11-month interval between the date of the alleged acts of child molestation and the affidavit, a consideration of all of the facts and circumstances supports the magistrate's conclusion that there was probable cause to believe the knives remained at defendant's home. The affidavit showed that the alleged crimes were a manifestation of a long term pattern of conduct on the part of defendant towards adolescent males. The knives were non-perishable, non-consumable items which were legally possessed and of continuing utility to defendant. The lapse of time did not prevent a conclusion that there was probable cause to believe that such permanent possessions would be found in defendant's home. Tuzman v. State, 145 Ga.App. 761, 764(2),...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Amica v. the State.
...S.E.2d 217 (2000), overruled on other grounds, Vergara v. State, 283 Ga. 175, 177(1), 657 S.E.2d 863 (2008). 9. Reeves v. State, 197 Ga.App. 107, 108(1), 397 S.E.2d 601 (1990) (physical precedent only); Tuzman v. State, 145 Ga.App. 761, 765(2)(A), 244 S.E.2d 882 (1978). 10. See Lemon v. Sta......
-
McClain v. State
...returned to his residence after the shooting, which occurred in the early hours of the morning. Williams, supra; Reeves v. State, 197 Ga.App. 107, 108, 397 S.E.2d 601 (1990). The trial court's finding of probable cause was not clearly erroneous. Durden v. State, 187 Ga.App. 433, 370 S.E.2d ......
-
State v. Towe, A00A1140.
...727-728, 234 S.E.2d 911 (1977)." McClain v. State, 267 Ga. 378, 388(11), 477 S.E.2d 814 (1996). As concluded in Reeves v. State, 197 Ga.App. 107, 108(1), 397 S.E.2d 601 (1990), regarding [t]he [firearms] were non-perishable, non-consumable items which were legally possessed and of continuin......
-
Ferrell v. State, A90A1615
...326 S.E.2d 840 (1985). It follows that the trial court did not err in denying appellant's motions to suppress. Reeves v. State, 197 Ga.App. 107(1), 397 S.E.2d 601 (1990). 2. Hair samples from appellant's person were taken pursuant to a search warrant. Appellant's motion to suppress this evi......