314 Ga. App. 17
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- On August 19, 2010, a Fayette County narcotics agent sought a no-knock search warrant for a Fayetteville residence.
- The affidavit claimed marijuana residue found in a curbside trash receptacle and identified McLeod and Chaves as residents.
- The no-knock request was justified with boilerplate assertions that drugs could be destroyed and weapons protected the premises.
- An additional portion of the affidavit referenced a social worker's report from five months earlier describing a gun in a resident's jacket; the agent acknowledged no firearm was observed during surveillance.
- The agent admitted the residence was under surveillance March–August 2010 with no firearms observed and the social worker was deemed unreliable by him.
- The warrant was executed August 25, 2010, resulting in marijuana being found; defendants moved to suppress the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the no-knock provision was supported by particular facts | State argues no-knock justified by weapon and destruction risk | Barnett et al. contend boilerplate, no particularized facts | No-knock invalid; lacks particularized facts |
| Whether the firearm information was stale and rendered invalid | State contends firearm info from five months earlier remains valid | Chaves et al. argue stale and unreliable | Firearm tip stale; insufficient corroboration |
| Whether exigent circumstances justified no-knock entry | State asserts exigent circumstances from destruction/armed occupants | Defendants deny exigent circumstances were shown | No exigent circumstances shown |
| Whether knocking and announcing could sustain the warrant | State relies on absence of explicit alternative basis in record | No evidence officers knocked/announced; alternative basis not shown | Record does not show knock-and-announce; not sustained |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. State, 280 Ga.App. 716 (2006) (no-knock allowed only with case-specific facts, not blanket rule)
- Crow v. State, 267 Ga.App. 188 (2004) (staleness factors depend on corroboration and likelihood information remains true)
- Amica v. State, 307 Ga.App. 276 (2010) (accomplice details may preserve timeliness of information under facts)
- Hale v. State, 220 Ga.App. 667 (1996) (ongoing pattern can render information non-stale)
- Adams v. State, 201 Ga.App. 12 (1991) (exigent circumstances debated; record lacking in this case)
- State v. Ballew, 290 Ga.App. 751 (2008) (no-knock inquiry not resolved where alternative basis exists)
- Williams v. State, 275 Ga.App. 612 (2005) (blanket assumptions about drug cases insufficient for no-knock)