Mayo v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Mayo v. State

207 S.E.2d 237, 131 Ga. App. 831, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1570

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 17, 1974

Docket49272; 49273

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 207 S.E.2d 237 (Mayo 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

Mayo v. State, 207 S.E.2d 237, 131 Ga. App. 831, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1570 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Webb, Judge.

Defendant Mayo, who is charged with possessing a plastic bag of marijuana, and defendant Tidwell, who is charged with possessing marijuana cigarettes, appeal with certificates of immediate review from the pretrial overruling of their motions to suppress evidence which, by stipulation, were heard and ruled upon jointly. In view of the evidence adduced at the hearing, summarized below, we find no error in overruling the motions even though the police officers had no search or arrest warrant. See, e.g., Brooks v. State, 129 Ga. App. 393, 394 (3) (199 SE2d 578); Williams v. State, 129 Ga. App. 103, 105 (1) (198 SE2d 683); Craft v. State, 124 Ga. App. 57, 58 (3) (183 SE2d 37); Green v. State, 127 Ga. App. 713 (194 SE2d 678).

Judgments affirmed.

Pannell, P. J., and Evans, J., concur. Tilman E. Self, for appellants. Clarence H. Clay, Jr., Solicitor, James M. Wootan, John R. Sikes, for appellee.

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

Webb, Judge.

Defendant Mayo, who is charged with possessing a plastic bag of marijuana, and defendant Tidwell, who is charged with possessing marijuana cigarettes, appeal with certificates of immediate review from the pretrial overruling of their motions to suppress evidence which, by stipulation, were heard and ruled upon jointly. In view of the evidence adduced at the hearing, summarized below, we find no error in overruling the motions even though the police officers had no search or arrest warrant. See, e.g., Brooks v. State, 129 Ga. App. 393, 394 (3) (199 SE2d 578); Williams v. State, 129 Ga. App. 103, 105 (1) (198 SE2d 683); Craft v. State, 124 Ga. App. 57, 58 (3) (183 SE2d 37); Green v. State, 127 Ga. App. 713 (194 SE2d 678).

Judgments affirmed.

Pannell, P. J., and Evans, J., concur. Tilman E. Self, for appellants. Clarence H. Clay, Jr., Solicitor, James M. Wootan, John R. Sikes, for appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 S.E.2d 237, 131 Ga. App. 831, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1570, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mayo-v-state-gactapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack