Adkinson v. State
322 Ga. App. 1
Ga. Ct. App.2013Background
- Adkinson charged with cocaine, marijuana, false information, and suspended license after a traffic stop.
- Adkinson moved to suppress evidence obtained during the stop; trial court denied.
- On interlocutory appeal, the appellate court reviewed de novo the lawfulness of the stop.
- Officer stopped Adkinson at a motel in a high drug activity area after Adkinson briefly visited the motel.
- Officer observed a small bag of crack cocaine on the driver’s seat during a stop; subsequent search revealed true identity and a warrant.
- Trial court upheld the stop as supported by reasonable articulable suspicion; appellate court reverses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop was supported by reasonable articulable suspicion | Adkinson: no particularized basis; mere presence in high crime area insufficient | Adkinson: officer relied on pattern of behavior and high drug area to justify stop | Stop invalid; no reasonable articulable suspicion |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (U.S. Supreme Court 1968) (brief investigative stop requires articulable suspicion)
- Blakely v. State, 316 Ga. App. 213 (Ga. App. 2012) (investigative stop requires objective manifestation of criminal activity)
- State v. Hopper, 293 Ga. App. 220 (Ga. App. 2008) (presence in high crime area alone insufficient; pattern-based reasoning invalid)
- Hughes v. State, 269 Ga. 258 (Ga. 1998) (similar principle re: high crime area and non-specific suspicion)
- Duke v. State, 247 Ga. App. 512 (Ga. App. 2001) (no objective basis where limited observations do not show misconduct)
- Sommese v. State, 299 Ga. App. 664 (Ga. App. 2009) (standard of review in suppression appeals; credibility findings preserved)