Johnson v. State, 313 Ga. App. 137

Johnson was found guilty at a bench trial of possession of MDMA under the Georgia Controlled Substances Act.
The defense moved to suppress evidence obtained from Johnson’s search; the court denied the motion and admitted the MDMA.
Detention occurred when officers stopped Johnson near a restaurant following a suspicious-behavior report and prior robbery concerns.
A brief pat-down for weapons was conducted, yielding no weapons, before Johnson consented to a narcotics search.
Consent to search followed questions about Johnson’s purpose in the area and was the basis for discovery of the substance.
The State argued the stop and search were constitutional under reasonable suspicion and consent; the defense urged the pat-down tainted the subsequent search.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether suppression was proper for the search evidence	Johnson	Johnson; tainted by illegal detention	Denied; consent valid; evidence admitted.
What is the proper standard of review on appeal	Johnson	Palmer/Underwood deference not applicable	De novo review applied.
Whether the pat-down was constitutionally justified	Johnson	Spahr’s pat-down justified by reasonable suspicion	Pat-down not supported by reasonable suspicion; taint analysis necessary.
Whether Johnson’s consent to search was voluntary and not tainted	Johnson	Consent independent of taint	Consent not proven voluntary free of taint; evidence suppressed.

United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411 (1981) (reasonable suspicion standard for investigative stops)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (pat-downs permissible for safety when armed and dangerous)
Vansant v. State, 264 Ga. 319 (1994) (totality of circumstances for reasonable suspicion; deference limits)
Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398 (2006) (objective reasonableness; subjective state of mind irrelevant)
State v. Palmer, 285 Ga. 75 (2009) (de novo standard when facts undisputed and no trial findings)