State v. Paulitch

Court of Appeals of Georgia

State v. Paulitch

270 S.E.2d 51, 154 Ga. App. 785, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2387

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 4, 1980

Docket59958, 59959

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 270 S.E.2d 51 (State v. Paulitch) 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

State v. Paulitch, 270 S.E.2d 51, 154 Ga. App. 785, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2387 (Ga. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Banke, Judge.

The defendant was charged in separate indictments with two violations of the Controlled Substances Act. The indictment in case No. 59958 was for the possession of marijuana found in his truck during the execution of a search warrant issued by a justice of the peace. The indictment in case No. 59959 was for possession of phencyclidine and methamphetamine found during an allegedly consensual search of his home after his arrest on the marijuana charge. The basis for the warrant to search the truck was the affidavit of a narcotics agent who had received information supplied by an unidentified informant. After hearing, the trial court granted motions to suppress in both cases. The state appeals. Held:

In both instances, the trial court’s decision turned upon questions of fact and credibility. When such is the case, the finding of the trial court must be accepted unless clearly erroneous. Woodruff v. State, 233 Ga. 840 (3) (213 SE2d 689) (1975); Strickland v. State, 153 Ga. App. 51 (1) (264 SE2d 540) (1980). The rulings of the trial court, not being clearly erroneous, will not be disturbed.

Judgment affirmed.

McMurray, P. J., and Smith, J., concur.

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

Banke, Judge.

The defendant was charged in separate indictments with two violations of the Controlled Substances Act. The indictment in case No. 59958 was for the possession of marijuana found in his truck during the execution of a search warrant issued by a justice of the peace. The indictment in case No. 59959 was for possession of phencyclidine and methamphetamine found during an allegedly consensual search of his home after his arrest on the marijuana charge. The basis for the warrant to search the truck was the affidavit of a narcotics agent who had received information supplied by an unidentified informant. After hearing, the trial court granted motions to suppress in both cases. The state appeals. Held:

In both instances, the trial court’s decision turned upon questions of fact and credibility. When such is the case, the finding of the trial court must be accepted unless clearly erroneous. Woodruff v. State, 233 Ga. 840 (3) (213 SE2d 689) (1975); Strickland v. State, 153 Ga. App. 51 (1) (264 SE2d 540) (1980). The rulings of the trial court, not being clearly erroneous, will not be disturbed.

Judgment affirmed.

McMurray, P. J., and Smith, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 S.E.2d 51, 154 Ga. App. 785, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2387, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-paulitch-gactapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack