State v. Aultman
| Decision Date | 02 November 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 62835,62835 |
| Citation | 160 Ga.App. 550,287 S.E.2d 580 |
| Parties | The STATE v. AULTMAN. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Gary C. Christy, Dist. Atty., J. Anderson Harp, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellant.
Stephen W. Irving, Valdosta, A. Frank Grimsley, Cordele, for appellee.
The defendant is charged with burglary and theft by receiving stolen property. This is an interlocutory appeal by the state from the suppression of three knife sheaths seized from the open bed of his pickup truck.
Suspicion was drawn to the defendant during the course of an investigation into several crimes which had recently occurred in the county, to wit: the burglary of a television dealership, the burglary of a convenience store, the theft of a cigarette vending machine, the theft of tools from a maintenance garage, and the theft of a rifle from a parked vehicle. An unusual set of mismatched tire tracks was found at the site of three of these offenses, and one of the two officers handling the investigation discovered that the tires on the defendant's truck had similar mismatched tread designs. Also, the burglaries of the television dealership and the convenience store had been effected by smashing the front windows of these establishments, a method known to have been used by the defendant in carrying out a burglary for which he had previously served time.
Their suspicions thus aroused, the two officers drove to the defendant's place of employment to question him and were informed that he had gone home for lunch. The officers proceeded to his home, where they placed the premises under surveillance until the defendant drove away in his truck, accompanied by a companion. They followed him, pulled him over, and prevailed upon him to accompany them to the jail for questioning. The officer in charge of the investigation, testified that he told the defendant "that we needed to talk to him at the jail and if he wanted to, come ride with me and I'd let Officer West drive your truck..." The jail was approximately a 5-minute drive away. The officers testified that they separated the two suspects during the drive to prevent them from talking to each other.
After arriving at the jail, the defendant and his companion were advised of their Miranda rights, whereupon they refused to answer any questions. At this point, one of the officers went outside, looked in the open bed of the truck, and noticed three knife sheaths in plain view on top of a garbage can. Knowing that several knives and sheaths had been reported stolen in the convenience store burglary, the officers then opened three plastic garbage bags which were also in the truck bed. They proved to contain the smashed remains of a television set. The defendant was formally placed under arrest following these discoveries, and additional incriminating evidence was later obtained from his home pursuant to the execution of three search warrants. Although all of this evidence was suppressed by the trial court, it is only the exclusion of the knife sheaths which is enumerated as error in this appeal. Held :
The essential purpose of the Fourth Amendment is to shield the citizen from unwarranted intrustions by the government upon his privacy. Cardwell v. Lewis, 417 U.S. 583, 589, 94 S.Ct. 2464, 2468, 41 L.Ed.2d 325 (1974), citing Jones v. United States, 357 U.S. 493, 498, 78 S.Ct. 1253, 1256, 2 L.Ed.2d 1514 (1958). "What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection." Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351, 88...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Galloway v. State
...Brooks v. State, 129 Ga.App. 393 (199 SE2d 578) (1973); Hatcher v. State, 141 Ga.App. 756 (234 SE2d 388) (1977)." State v. Aultman, 160 Ga.App. 550, 551, 287 S.E.2d 580 (1981). This doctrine is applicable equally to homes and automobiles. Thus, in State v. Key, 164 Ga.App. 411, 412, 296 S.E......
-
Merriman v. State
...as he has not violated the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights in the process of establishing his vantage point." State v. Aultman, 160 Ga.App. 550, 551, 287 S.E.2d 580 (1981). Accord State v. Zackery, 193 Ga.App. 319, 387 S.E.2d 606 The evidence is unclear exactly where the boundary of def......
-
Thomas v. State
...23 (83 SC 1623, 10 LE2d 726) (1963); Harris v. United States, 390 U.S. 234 (88 SC 992, 19 LE2d 1067) (1968)...." State v. Aultman, 160 Ga.App. 550, 551, 287 S.E.2d 580 (1981). The rule allowing the warrantless search of open fields provides that, "an individual may not legitimately demand p......
-
Dunn v. State
...inculpatory. See State v. Brooks, 160 Ga.App. 381, 287 S.E.2d 95; State v. Nichols, 160 Ga.App. 386, 287 S.E.2d 53; State v. Aultman, 160 Ga.App. 550, 551, 287 S.E.2d 580. The trial court did not err in allowing the articles of clothing in evidence. The trial court's findings as to the fact......