DeGEORGIS v. THE STATE
339 Ga. App. 25
Ga. Ct. App.2016Background
- Police received a computer tower from DeGeorgis’s estranged wife after she returned to the marital home and discovered images she believed were child pornography on the hard drive.
- A Holly Springs police lieutenant viewed the wife’s flagged images at her request, kept the tower plus a second tower and two external drives, and sought forensic analysis and warrants.
- Forensic imaging of the equipment (one external drive was defective) revealed numerous obscene images, including many electronic images the examiner flagged as depicting minors; officers later seized 28 printed images from locked containers in DeGeorgis’s sealed “man cave.”
- Officers executed a residential search warrant; DeGeorgis provided a key to a cabinet holding keys to locked containers, and admitted possession of ziplock baggies of women’s undergarments found in a drawer.
- DeGeorgis was charged with two counts of sexual exploitation of children (OCGA § 16-12-100(b)(8)); he moved to suppress (1) electronic images obtained after the lieutenant viewed the wife’s discovery, and (2) his admission about possession of the undergarments. The trial court denied suppression and he was convicted; this appeal follows.
Issues
| Issue | DeGeorgis’s Argument | State’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the lieutenant’s viewing of the wife’s computer and subsequent warrants violated the Fourth Amendment | Wife’s entry was unauthorized; her viewing and consent were void, so the lieutenant’s viewing was unlawful and warrants were fruit of the poisonous tree | A private citizen independently discovered the material; the lieutenant’s verification did not implicate the Fourth Amendment and provided probable cause for warrants | Court held no Fourth Amendment violation: private discovery by wife authorized initial view; lieutenant’s verification lawful; warrants valid |
| Whether DeGeorgis’s admission of possession of undergarments was involuntary and should be suppressed | Statement was involuntary because officer seized his cell phone and (allegedly) car keys and he did not believe he could leave | Phone was seized under the warrant; officers did not seize car keys; DeGeorgis was not arrested, not confined, and could have left | Court held admission voluntary: seizure of phone was authorized, no evidence keys were seized, and DeGeorgis was free to leave |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. State, 336 Ga. App. 428 (Ga. Ct. App.) (standard of review on sufficiency of evidence)
- Johnson v. State, 231 Ga. App. 823 (Ga. Ct. App.) (private citizen discovery of contraband negates Fourth Amendment claim)
- Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109 (U.S. Supreme Court) (Fourth Amendment protects only against governmental searches; private searches do not implicate the Amendment)
- Hitchcock v. State, 291 Ga. App. 455 (Ga. Ct. App.) (Fourth Amendment inapplicable where private individual, not government agent, discovered evidence)
- Hobbs v. State, 272 Ga. App. 148 (Ga. Ct. App.) (privacy invasion measured by whether authorities exceeded scope of private search)
- Henson v. State, 314 Ga. App. 152 (Ga. Ct. App.) (officer’s prior observation of contraband can supply probable cause for additional warrants)
- Quedens v. State, 280 Ga. 355 (Ga.) (standard for voluntariness of statements)
- Bragg v. State, 295 Ga. 676 (Ga.) (factors relevant to voluntariness and admissibility of statements)