State v. Bryant
Decision Date | 20 September 1993 |
Docket Number | A93A0949,Nos. A93A0948,s. A93A0948 |
Citation | 436 S.E.2d 57,210 Ga.App. 319 |
Parties | The STATE v. BRYANT (two cases). |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Thomas J. Charron, Dist. Atty., Debra H. Bernes, Nancy I. Jordan, Asst. Dist. Attys., for appellant.
Jack J. Menendez, Marietta, for appellees.
Dale Bryant and Terry Bryant were charged with violating the Georgia Controlled Substances Act by possessing cocaine with the intent to distribute. They moved to suppress evidence seized during a search of Dale Bryant's apartment. The trial court granted the motion, and the State appeals.
Officer Michelle Scott obtained a search warrant for Dale Bryant's apartment based on a tip from an informant. In her affidavit in support of the search warrant, she stated that The affiant went on to state that the informant told affiant Dale Bryant's address and described his vehicle and tag number and that the information regarding his address and vehicle was independently corroborated. The affiant also stated that the informant described Dale Bryant's physical appearance and told her where Dale Bryant banked and this information was also independently confirmed. Lastly, the affiant stated that her office had received another complaint naming Dale Bryant as a drug dealer but did not identify the source of the complaint. The trial court granted the motion to suppress, ruling that the search warrant lacked probable cause because the affidavit did not set forth sufficient facts from which the magistrate could independently determine the reliability of the information and the informant. In its sole enumeration of error, the State contends that this ruling was erroneous.
" Salter v. State, 198 Ga.App. 242, 243(1), 401 S.E.2d 541 (1990). While establishment of the informant's veracity and basis of knowledge is no longer an absolute requirement since Gates, veracity and basis of knowledge are still major considerations in the probable cause analysis, and this court continues to hold that State v. Teague, 192 Ga.App. 839, 840, 386 S.E.2d 718 (1989). Officer Scott's affidavit in this case provided no factual information regarding the informant's veracity or basis of knowledge; she did not, for example, state that the informant was known to her, that he had provided useful information in the past, or that his information came from personal knowledge. Compare State v. McKendree, 188 Ga.App. 290, 372 S.E.2d 673 (1988). Although Officer Scott testified at the hearing on the motion to suppress that she met with the informant and observed him coming out of Dale Bryant's apartment, the State failed to establish that she communicated this information to the magistrate. Moreover, even if these additional facts were considered, they would not be sufficient to allow the magistrate to independently evaluate the reliability of the informant and his information. See Teague, supra ( ). "The complete lack of information about the informant and the basis of his knowledge relegated the information he...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wiggins v. State
...did not make the informant reliable because the “same information was available to the general public”); State v. Bryant, 210 Ga.App. 319, 321, 436 S.E.2d 57 (1993) (holding that corroboration of an informant's description of defendant's appearance, residence, car, and bank was public infor......
-
Davis v. State, A94A0659
...basis of knowledge." (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Munson, supra 211 Ga.App. at 82, 438 S.E.2d 123; compare State v. Bryant, 210 Ga.App. 319, 321, 436 S.E.2d 57 (1993); State v. Teague, 192 Ga.App. 839, 386 S.E.2d 718 (1989). In concluding that no probable cause existed, the majority......
-
State v. Wesson
...the magistrate or judge can independently determine the reliability of both the information and the informant. State v. Bryant, 210 Ga.App. 319, 320, 436 S.E.2d 57 (1993). In determining whether an affidavit sufficiently establishes the probable cause necessary for issuance of a warrant, we......
-
Claire v. State, A00A2515.
...both cases are distinguishable. In Teague, the informant had never previously furnished information to law enforcement officials.11 And in Bryant, the affidavit contained no factual information regarding the informant's veracity or basis of Claire also argues that the affiant did not corrob......