State v. Williams
| Decision Date | 09 November 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. A89A1366,A89A1366 |
| Citation | 193 Ga.App. 462,388 S.E.2d 55 |
| Parties | The STATE v. WILLIAMS. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Willis B. Sparks, III, Dist. Atty., Kimberly S. Shumate, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellant.
Renee S. Schwartz, Macon, for appellee.
The State appeals from the grant of appellee's motion to suppress the cocaine seized from him in a warrantless search. We affirm the trial court's ruling.
It is well established that in a motion to suppress the trial judge sits as the trier of fact, and that holds true even when there is a conflict in the evidence presented. The credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be accorded their testimony rest with the trier of fact, who is under no obligation to believe a witness, even in the absence of contradictory testimony. The factfinder may accept part of a witness' testimony and reject another part, and State v. Betsill, 144 Ga.App. 267(2), 240 S.E.2d 781 (1977). We have reviewed the transcript of the suppression hearing, and based on the conflicting testimony of the officers and the appellee and on the inconsistencies in the various reports and testimony of the officers, the trial court was authorized to find that the arresting officers were part of an eight-man team assigned to arrest an armed robbery suspect (not appellee); that while the team was exiting the police vehicle in which they arrived at the scene, a number of people gathered to watch the activity; that appellee, who resided in the other apartment in the duplex apartment building where the suspect lived, had just left his apartment and gotten into a friend's car to go to work; and that when appellee got into the vehicle, he closed the door and moved to put a soft drink can he had had in his pocket on the floorboard of the vehicle, placing the can to the inside of his legs so that his legs were between the can and the door. The officers saw appellee's actions, drew their weapons, approached the car, and ordered appellee out of the car. One of the officers admitted that at that point appellee was under arrest. The officers requested identification and appellee complied. Appellee testified that one of the officers told appellee he saw him "put something down on the seat" and that when the officer opened the door, he saw the soft drink can. The officer then handcuffed appellee, searched him, and found a matchbox containing cocaine in his pocket.
The trial court concluded that appellee's warrantless arrest was without...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Peterson, S00A1512.
...this court will not reverse the ruling sustaining a motion to suppress. (Cit.)' [Cit.]" (Emphasis supplied.) State v. Williams, 193 Ga.App. 462, 388 S.E.2d 55 (1989) (Benham, J.). See also State v. Combs, 191 Ga.App. 625, 627(2), 382 S.E.2d 691 (1989) (Benham, J.). Furthermore, the issue is......
-
State v. Aguirre, A97A1570
...determination, (the appellate) court will not reverse the ruling sustaining a motion to suppress. (Cit.)" (Cit.)' State v. Williams, 193 Ga.App. 462, 388 S.E.2d 55 (1989)." Anderson v. State, 267 Ga. 116, 118, 475 S.E.2d The State maintains that three circumstances combined to authorize the......
-
Bettis v. State
...116, 118-119 , 475 S.E.2d 629 (1996); Maynard v. State of Ga., 217 Ga.App. 344, 346, 457 S.E.2d 253 (1995); see also State v. Williams, 193 Ga.App. 462, 388 S.E.2d 55 (1989). "On appeal, we view the evidence in a light most favorable to the court's judgment. See Gearin v. State of Ga., 218 ......
-
State v. Henderson
...the trier of fact, who is under no obligation to believe a witness, even in the absence of contradictory testimony." State v. Williams, 193 Ga.App. 462, 388 S.E.2d 55 (1989). The purpose of a Terry pat-down is to determine whether a person is carrying a weapon and not to discover evidence o......