Carter v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Carter v. State

301 S.E.2d 658, 165 Ga. App. 427, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 3156

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 14, 1983

Docket65587

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 301 S.E.2d 658 (Carter v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carter v. State, 301 S.E.2d 658, 165 Ga. App. 427, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 3156 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

Banke, Judge.

The probationary aspect of the defendant’s sentence for violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act was revoked on evidence that he sold marijuana to an undercover agent of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation. In his sole enumeration of error and in reliance upon Thornton v. State, 238 Ga. 160 (2) (231 SE2d 729) (1977), the defendant contends that the state should have been required to disclose the identity of an informer whose tip led the agent to him and who was present when the sale took place. See generally Roviaro v. United States, 353 U. S. 53 (77 SC 623, 1 LE2d 639) (1957). Held:

“Where a person merely takes an undercover police officer to a location and identifies, or introduces the officer to the defendant, and the officer arranges for and buys contraband from the defendant, and the person witnesses such sale, or alleged sale, such person is an informer and not a ‘decoy’ and a disclosure of his name, address, etc., to the defendant is not required as a matter of law... but rests in the discretion of the trial judge ...” Taylor v. State, 136 Ga. App. 31 (2) (220 SE2d 49) (1975). See also Howard v. State, 144 Ga. App. 208 (3) (240 SE2d 908) (1977).

*428 Decided February 14, 1983. John B. Thigpen, Sr., for appellant. C. Deen Strickland, District Attorney, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Carley, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Banke, Judge.

The probationary aspect of the defendant’s sentence for violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act was revoked on evidence that he sold marijuana to an undercover agent of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation. In his sole enumeration of error and in reliance upon Thornton v. State, 238 Ga. 160 (2) (231 SE2d 729) (1977), the defendant contends that the state should have been required to disclose the identity of an informer whose tip led the agent to him and who was present when the sale took place. See generally Roviaro v. United States, 353 U. S. 53 (77 SC 623, 1 LE2d 639) (1957). Held:

“Where a person merely takes an undercover police officer to a location and identifies, or introduces the officer to the defendant, and the officer arranges for and buys contraband from the defendant, and the person witnesses such sale, or alleged sale, such person is an informer and not a ‘decoy’ and a disclosure of his name, address, etc., to the defendant is not required as a matter of law... but rests in the discretion of the trial judge ...” Taylor v. State, 136 Ga. App. 31 (2) (220 SE2d 49) (1975). See also Howard v. State, 144 Ga. App. 208 (3) (240 SE2d 908) (1977).

*428 Decided February 14, 1983. John B. Thigpen, Sr., for appellant. C. Deen Strickland, District Attorney, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Carley, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

301 S.E.2d 658, 165 Ga. App. 427, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 3156, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carter-v-state-gactapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack