State v. Estrado, 67564
| Decision Date | 19 April 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 67564,67564 |
| Citation | 170 Ga.App. 889,318 S.E.2d 505 |
| Parties | The STATE v. ESTRADO et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Bruce L. Udolf, Dist. Atty., Charles H. Frier, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellant.
John N. Crudup and James H. Whitmer, Gainesville, for appellees.
The State appeals the trial court's grant of appellees' motion to suppress. The evidence adduced at the hearing revealed that on April 22, 1983, a detective for the Gainesville Police Department received information from a confidential informant he had known for four years and whose reliability had been established by furnishing information which had resulted in several arrests and subsequent convictions. The informant told the detective that a 1970 blue Trans Am automobile would be coming from Texas to Gainesville and would arrive either on Saturday, the 23rd, or Sunday, the 24th of April. The informant further stated that the car would have Georgia license plates and a Dawson County sticker but that he did not know the license plate number. The informant did not know any of the occupants of the Trans Am, but he said that somewhere en route from Texas, the Trans Am would rendezvous with a black jeep driven by co-appellee Dennis McCrary. The two vehicles, one of which the informant claimed would be carrying 30-50 pounds of marijuana, were supposed to go to McCrary's residence off Lawson-Robinson Road or to another location off State Highway 53. Further investigation by Hall County law enforcement officers failed to reveal the exact location of McCrary's house.
On Saturday, April 23, law enforcement officers observed a black jeep and a blue Trans Am traveling together on Lawson-Robinson Road. On the strength of the informant's tip, the officers stopped the two vehicles and, after detecting a strong odor of marijuana emanating from the Trans Am, found several large plastic bags of marijuana in the car's trunk. Weighing scales and plastic bags were seized from the jeep. The occupants of the jeep and the Trans Am were then placed under arrest for violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act.
Appellees filed a motion to suppress the evidence found in the vehicles. In his order granting appellees' motion, the trial judge found that the law enforcement officers should have obtained a search warrant prior to stopping the vehicles in question or, in the alternative, should have obtained a warrant after the vehicles had been stopped.
1. The State contends that although the informant's information, coupled with the officer's independent corroboration, was adequate to provide probable cause to stop and search the vehicles, the information was not specific enough to authorize the issuance of a search warrant. Durrett v. State, 136 Ga.App. 114, 115, 220 S.E.2d 92. In the present case, the officers were provided with information consisting of a general description of two vehicles allegedly traveling together down one of two different roads. No tag number was given for either vehicle and the identity of only one of the occupants was known. Barfield v. State, 160 Ga.App. 228(2), 286 S.E.2d 516. Therefore, the officers did not err by failing to obtain a search warrant before they stopped appellees' vehicles.
2. The question that now arises is whether the police officers should have obtained a search warrant after they stopped but before they searched the vehicles. " ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Sweedland
..."when he observed a `small cloud' of smoke floating from the vehicle and smelled the odor of burning marijuana"); State v. Estrado, 170 Ga.App. 889, 318 S.E.2d 505, 507 (1984) (information officer received was insufficient to detain defendants, but officer smelling marijuana provided the co......
-
Brown v. State, S98A0981.
...under one of the `specifically established and well-delineated exceptions' to the warrant requirement. [Cit.]" State v. Estrado, 170 Ga.App. 889, 890(2), 318 S.E.2d 505 (1984). Accordingly, because the search of Brown's car did not come within any of the exceptions that authorize a warrantl......
-
Hall v. State
...there is only a requirement that the search and seizure be based upon sufficient probable cause.' [Cits.]" State v. Estrado, 170 Ga.App. 889, 891, 318 S.E.2d 505 (1984); see Smith v. State, 135 Ga.App. 424, 218 S.E.2d 133 (1975); California v. Carney, 471 U.S. 386, 105 S.Ct. 2066, 85 L.Ed.2......
-
BLANCE v. State, No. A03A0466.
...including, but not limited to, information obtained by officers conducting a common investigation. State v. Estrado, 170 Ga.App. 889, 890-891(2), 318 S.E.2d 505 (1984). Here, Blance's car was moving out of the parking lot when stopped. The car had out-of-state license plates, leading the of......