The Georgia Court of Appeals recently ruled that a Georgia trial court erred in denying a motorist’s motion to suppress evidence of illegal drugs that police found in his car after they stopped him for not having a current registration decal visible on his car tag. The police, after stopping the motorist for not having a current registration decal visible on his car tag, were able to see the current registration decal as they approached the car. Instead of letting the motorist go after observing the decal when they approached the car, the police continued to detain the motorist and question him, because he looked “nervous.” The Court ruled that the detention was longer than was necessary to effectuate the original purpose of the stop, and was not lawful. Please contact Rumsey & Ramsey at (770) 394-9400 to discuss the facts of your case with an attorney.
Tag Archives: Criminal Lawyer Atlanta
Recent Georgia Supreme Court Cases Affirm Restrictions on Police Use of Roadblocks To Achieve DUI Criminal Convictions.
In two recent Georgia criminal cases decided by the Georgia Supreme Court, the court found in both cases that the Georgia motorists charged with driving under the influence (DUI) had their 4th Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures violated by the methods used by police to stop them at roadblocks and gain evidence to charge them with DUI. Accordingly, the court found that the evidence obtained at the roadblocks that was used to charge the motorists with DUI could not be introduced as evidence in their criminal cases. The court clarified the rules for police use of roadblocks that lead to criminal charges against citizens. The rules for police to follow are that the decision to implement the roadblock must be made in advance by supervisory personnel and not officers in the field, that all vehicles must be stopped, the delay to motorists is minimal, the roadblock is well identified as a police checkpoint, and the screening officer at the checkpoint must have sufficient training and experience to know which motorists should be given sobriety field tests. Additionally, the roadblock program must have a primary purpose other than ordinary crime control. Lastly, when challenged, the police must show that under the totality of the circumstances the stop was reasonable. Please contact Rumsey & Ramsey at (770) 394-9400 to discuss your case with a lawyer.
Georgia homeowners’ 4th Amendment Rights were violated when police walked through their yard, smelled raw marijuana, and obtained a search warrant based on what they smelled.
Police officers in Georgia, who were in pursuit of a person who had fled the scene of an accident, walked across the lawn of a residence and smelled raw marijuana coming from the residence. The owners of the residence were in no way connected with the person that ran from the accident scene. The police obtained a search warrant based on what they smelled coming from the residence, and they found marijuana. The Georgia Court of Appeals recently ruled that the marijuana the police obtained in the residence pursuant to the search warrant was found in violation of the homeowners’ Fourth Amendment Rights. The Court found that since the initial intrusion onto the property looking for the suspect was without consent, a warrant, or probable cause and exigent circumstances, the officers were illegally present on the property in violation of the Fourth Amendment when they smelled the marijuana. Please contact Rumsey & Ramsey at (770) 394-9400 to discuss the facts of your case with a lawyer.
Georgia golfer’s 4th Amendment Rights violated by police who searched his car simply because he was seen leaving golf course late.
The Georgia Court of Appeals recently ruled that a golfer’s Fourth Amendment rights were violated when he was stopped by a police officer in a police vehicle in the golf course parking lot as the golfer was driving away after the golf course had closed for the day. The Court of Appeals ruled that the police officer had no particularized and objective basis for suspecting that the golfer was committing a crime by merely being at the golf course after hours, and so the stop of the golfer was in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. A mere subjective feeling that the golfer was acting in a suspicious way by being there after hours was not enough, and the marijuana found was illegal evidence. Please contact Rumsey & Ramsey at (770) 394-9400 to discuss the facts of your case with a lawyer.