Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/State v. Thomas

State v. Thomas

257 S.E.2d 28, 150 Ga. App. 170, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 2169
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided May 17, 1979·No. 57598·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Banke, Acting Presiding Judge.

The state appeals the partial grant of the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence in this prosecution for the distribution of obscene materials. It is urged both that the motion is facially defective and that the defendant did not meet his burden of proving that the search and seizure were illegal. Held:

1. The contention that the motion was facially defective cannot be considered on appeal since it was not raised in the trial court. See Nix v. State, 94 Ga. App. 141 (2) (93 SE2d 783) (1956); Bell v. State, 144 Ga. App. 692 (1) (242 SE2d 345) (1978).

2. The burden of proving that the search was lawful was on the state, not the defendant. Code Ann. § 27-313 (b); State v. Mabrey, 140 Ga. App. 577, 579 (231 SE2d 461) (1976).

Judgment affirmed.

Underwood and Carley, JJ., concur.

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

State v. Thomas, 257 S.E.2d 28, 150 Ga. App. 170, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 2169 (Ga. Ct. App. 1979).

257 S.E.2d 28 (State v. Thomas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Smith
296 S.E.2d 141 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1982)
Williams v. State
281 S.E.2d 524 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1981)
Simpson v. State
283 S.E.2d 91 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1981)
Curry v. State
273 S.E.2d 411 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1980)
Harris v. State
270 S.E.2d 854 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1980)