Wood v. State
| Decision Date | 08 October 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 3,No. 43929,43929,3 |
| Citation | 164 S.E.2d 233,118 Ga.App. 477 |
| Parties | Roy WOOD v. The STATE |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Guy B. Scott, Jr., Athens, for appellant.
Clete D. Johnson, Solicitor Gen., Royston, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
1. 'The courts have decided that the Constitution requires that there be presented to the judicial officer issuing the (search) warrant some of the underlying circumstances relied on by the officer applying for the warrant, and, if the officer relies on an informant, some of the underlying circumstances from which the officer concluded that his informant was reliable.' Marshall v. State, 113 Ga.App. 143, 146, 147 S.E.2d 666, 668; Hill v. State, 114 Ga.App. 527, 528, 151 S.E.2d 818. Personal observation by the affiant that known violators of the law sought to be enforced frequented the defendant's home, plus information 'from an informant who had proven reliable in the past' of specific facts sufficient to constitute probable cause will authorize the issuance of the warrant. Landers v. State, 114 Ga.App. 687(1), 152 S.E.2d 431. As against the motion to suppress evidence filed in this case on the ground that the evidence had been obtained as the result of a search under a warrant void on its face and issued without probable cause, the evidence was properly admitted. The thrust of the attack upon the warrant goes to the allegations of the supporting affidavit, which measure up in every particular to the criteria set in Landers, supra. The judicial magistrate is authorized to issue the warrant in all instances where the showing is made under oath and contains facts sufficient to show probable cause. Code Ann. § 27-303. It is subject to attack on a motion to suppress evidence on the trial of the case for the reason, among others, that it was illegally executed (Code Ann. § 27-313), and proof that the facts sworn to in the supporting affidavit were actually false might well be proof of illegal execution. This was not, however, made a ground of the motion to suppress evidence in the present case. The officer whose name was signed to the supporting affidavit admitted on cross examination that some of the 'facts' which he swore the informant had told him had not been furnished him at the time the affidavit was made, including the statement that the informant (Moxley) had purchased beer and whiskey from the defendant. Moxley, testifying on the subsequent trial of the case, swore...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Burns v. State
...was reliable. Marshall v. State, 113 Ga.App. 143(1), 147 S.E.2d 666; Landers v. State, 114 Ga.App. 687, 152 S.E.2d 431; Wood v. State, 118 Ga.App. 477, 164 S.E.2d 233. In his affidavit should appear a recital of what the informant actually said, and why the officer thought that the informat......
-
State v. Sanders
...probable cause (,) the question must be determined as of the time the warrant issued ...." 1 (Emphasis supplied.) Wood v. State, 118 Ga.App. 477, 478, 164 S.E.2d 233 (1968). See State v. Lee, 247 La. 553, 172 So.2d 678 (1965). Although the majority states, "By no means do we imply that this......
-
Lewis v. State
...not comparable to ascribing to the informant statements which had not been made to the law enforcement officer as in Wood v. State, 118 Ga.App. 477, 478, 164 S.E.2d 233. (The motion to suppress therein was denied on another basis.) A common sense reading of the entire affidavit reveals that......
-
Garner v. State
...must be determined as of the time the warrant issued.' Burns v. State, 119 Ga.App. 678, 684, 168 S.E.2d 786, 790; Wood v. State, 118 Ga.App. 477, 478, 164 S.E.2d 233. Evidence obtained under a void warrant is evidence illegally obtained and it has been settled once and for all that the tain......