Travis v. State, A89A1317
| Decision Date | 05 September 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. A89A1317,A89A1317 |
| Citation | 385 S.E.2d 779,192 Ga.App. 695 |
| Parties | TRAVIS v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Stephen T. Maples, Decatur, Gregory N. Crawford, Savannah, for appellant.
Robert E. Wilson, Dist. Atty., Fran Shoenthal, Robert M. Coker, Asst. Dist. Attys., for appellee.
Following the denial of his motion to suppress, the appellant, while specifically reserving the right to appeal that ruling, pled guilty to an indictment charging him with possessing cocaine in violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act. This appeal followed.
Based upon information provided by a confidential informant that drugs were being "sold, stored and concealed" at a specified residence in DeKalb County, Georgia, a warrant was issued for the search of the premises. The warrant additionally authorized the search of two described individuals believed to be violating the Controlled Substances Act, as well as "any person on said premises ... for the discovery and seizure" of cocaine. Although the appellant was present on the premises during the execution of the warrant, he was not named in the warrant and was not a resident of the house.
Detective Brown of the City of Atlanta Narcotics Squad testified that after the officers executing the warrant knocked on the front door and identified themselves, they heard scuffling inside, whereupon, having received no response to their knocking, they forcibly entered the residence. Brown stated that at this time he gave chase to the appellant as the latter ran from the kitchen down a flight of stairs to the basement and through a back door into the backyard, where he was apprehended by another officer. Brown testified that he believed the appellant might be trying to dispose of contraband and that he might be armed and dangerous. An immediate patdown search of the appellant was conducted, following which he was taken into the house and searched more thoroughly. The second search resulted in the discovery of two small bags of cocaine on his person. The appellant testified that he had arrived at the house some 15 minutes prior to the execution of the warrant and that he was merely visiting the residence, which belonged to his uncle. Held:
OCGA § 17-5-28 provides as follows: "In the execution of the search warrant the officer executing the same may reasonably detain or search any person in the place at the time: (1) To protect himself from attack; or (2) To prevent the disposal or concealment of any instruments, article, or things particularly described in the search warrant." It has been held that this statute "does not limit the officer's right to search persons as to whom probable cause for a warrantless search exists." Wallace v. State, 131 Ga.App. 204, 205, 205 S.E.2d 523 (1974). See also Campbell v. State, 139 Ga.App. 389, 228 S.E.2d 309 (1976).
" ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Salter v. State
...search. State v. Reid, 247 Ga. 445, 447, 276 S.E.2d 617; Jones v. State, supra, 195 Ga.App. at 869(2), 395 S.E.2d 69; Travis v. State, 192 Ga.App. 695, 696, 385 S.E.2d 779. In this instance, evidence of flight was highly relevant, as the circumstances of flight, coupled with the totality of......
-
State v. Mallard
...OCGA § 17-5-28 does not limit the officer's right to search persons as to whom probable cause for a warrantless search exists. See Travis v. State;21 Wallace v. We now address whether or not the police had probable cause to stop the defendants, pursuant to Terry v. Ohio, supra. The only rea......
-
Moody v. State
...Hurston v. State, 202 Ga.App. 311, 414 S.E.2d 303 (1991); Scott v. State, 193 Ga.App. 74, 387 S.E.2d 31 (1989); Travis v. State, 192 Ga. App. 695, 696, 385 S.E.2d 779 (1989); Stafford v. State, 187 Ga.App. 401, 370 S.E.2d 646 (1988); Prather v. State, 116 Ga.App. 696, 158 S.E.2d 291 This ev......
-
Norton v. State
...the State's argument that the search was valid because it was conducted after Miranda Norton's lawful arrest. See Travis v. State, 192 Ga.App. 695, 696, 385 S.E.2d 779 (1989). We find no merit in this argument because the officers did not lawfully arrest Miranda The presence of contraband o......