Lee v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Lee v. State

198 S.E.2d 720, 129 Ga. App. 82, 1973 Ga. App. LEXIS 886

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 20, 1973

Docket48058

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 198 S.E.2d 720 (Lee 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

Lee v. State, 198 S.E.2d 720, 129 Ga. App. 82, 1973 Ga. App. LEXIS 886 (Ga. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Evans, Judge.

The defendant was indicted for the possession of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD). He filed a motion to suppress certain evidence — a matchbox containing ten pills of LSD which was allegedly seized from his motor vehicle. After a hearing, his motion was denied, and the defendant appeals.

The evidence at the hearing established that defendant was arrested for driving under the influence and without a driver’s license by DeKalb County police officers who investigated a traffic accident. After arrest, the officers proceeded to search his automobile for the alleged purpose of making a routine inventory of items in his car for a check of any valuables. The officer had *83 no search warrant. He testified that upon opening the door to his vehicle the officers observed a matchbox on the floorboard next to the seat near the running board panel. He picked it up, and it had ten pills in it. He then became suspicious that the defendant was violating the Georgia Drug Abuse Act, and he also arrested him for possession of illegal drugs. The pills were never identified as LSD, although the officer thought they were illegal drugs. He contended that it was routine for the DeKalb County police to make an inventory of valuables in a car upon impoundment, and that the pills were in plain view and not concealed in any way when he began this search, since the box was partially open. Held:

Argued April 5, 1973 Decided April 20, 1973 Rehearing denied May 11, 1973 Dan E. McConaughey, John W. Hinchey, for appellant. Richard Bell, District Attorney, George N. Guest, for appellee.

This case is controlled adversely to the defendant by Harris v. United States, 390 U. S. 234 (88 SC 992, 19 LE2d 1067), in that the evidence sought to be suppressed was discovered, not by means of a search and seizure in a technical sense, but was discovered by a police officer who had a right to be in the position he was in at the time he discovered the drugs. This evidence was in plain view and was discovered while in the process of making a routine inventory of valuables in an impounded car in accordance with police regulations.

Judgment affirmed.

Hall, P. J., and Clark, J., concur.

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

Evans, Judge.

The defendant was indicted for the possession of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD). He filed a motion to suppress certain evidence — a matchbox containing ten pills of LSD which was allegedly seized from his motor vehicle. After a hearing, his motion was denied, and the defendant appeals.

The evidence at the hearing established that defendant was arrested for driving under the influence and without a driver’s license by DeKalb County police officers who investigated a traffic accident. After arrest, the officers proceeded to search his automobile for the alleged purpose of making a routine inventory of items in his car for a check of any valuables. The officer had *83 no search warrant. He testified that upon opening the door to his vehicle the officers observed a matchbox on the floorboard next to the seat near the running board panel. He picked it up, and it had ten pills in it. He then became suspicious that the defendant was violating the Georgia Drug Abuse Act, and he also arrested him for possession of illegal drugs. The pills were never identified as LSD, although the officer thought they were illegal drugs. He contended that it was routine for the DeKalb County police to make an inventory of valuables in a car upon impoundment, and that the pills were in plain view and not concealed in any way when he began this search, since the box was partially open. Held:

Argued April 5, 1973 Decided April 20, 1973 Rehearing denied May 11, 1973 Dan E. McConaughey, John W. Hinchey, for appellant. Richard Bell, District Attorney, George N. Guest, for appellee.

This case is controlled adversely to the defendant by Harris v. United States, 390 U. S. 234 (88 SC 992, 19 LE2d 1067), in that the evidence sought to be suppressed was discovered, not by means of a search and seizure in a technical sense, but was discovered by a police officer who had a right to be in the position he was in at the time he discovered the drugs. This evidence was in plain view and was discovered while in the process of making a routine inventory of valuables in an impounded car in accordance with police regulations.

Judgment affirmed.

Hall, P. J., and Clark, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 S.E.2d 720, 129 Ga. App. 82, 1973 Ga. App. LEXIS 886, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lee-v-state-gactapp-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack