Sutton v. State, 319 Ga. App. 597

Eric Sutton appeals the denial of his motion to suppress evidence seized under a search warrant at his Flowery Branch home.
The trial court held the affidavit accompanying the warrant was legally sufficient to establish probable cause.
The State bears the burden to prove the search was lawful; here the issue centers on the reliability of confidential informants.
Informants identified as “It” (anonymous) and “Source A” provided the basis for the warrant, but neither had direct firsthand knowledge of Sutton’s drug activity.
The affidavit relied on hearsay from Source A via It; no independent corroboration of Source A’s claims or direct observations by officers occurred.
The reviewing court concludes the affidavit is legally insufficient to establish probable cause due to lack of reliable, corroborated informant information.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether It was a valid, credible informant	Sutton argues It is a mere anonymous tipster with no demonstrated reliability.	Ellington contends the affidavit properly classified It as a concerned citizen with credibility.	Probable cause not shown; It not sufficiently reliable.
Whether Source A’s information was corroborated or corroborable	Sutton asserts there was no independent corroboration of Source A’s statements.	State argues corroboration could be inferred from some independent details provided by It and officer observations.	Insufficient corroboration; information from Source A remains uncorroborated.
Whether the affidavit’s credibility findings for It and Source A were proper	Sutton contends the affidavit failed to establish It and Source A as credible or with a reliable basis of knowledge.	Ellington relies on the magistrate’s presumption of credibility given the concerned-citizen label and related case law.	Affidavit fails to establish credibility and reliability of both sources.
Whether the lack of corroboration defeats probable cause under totality of the circumstances	Sutton asserts the totality of circumstances does not support probable cause due to noncorroborated hearsay.	State argues hearsay can be sufficient if combined with corroborating indications and basis for belief in reliability.	Totality of circumstances does not yield probable cause here; warrant invalid.

Bryant v. State, 288 Ga. 876 (Ga. 2011) (probable cause assessed via totality; credibility interwoven with reliability)
Dearing v. State, 233 Ga. App. 630 (Ga. App. 1998) (informant reliability crucial for credibility in warrant affidavit)
Price v. State, 297 Ga. App. 501 (Ga. App. 2009) (detailed corroboration and corroborated informants strengthen probable cause)
Vansant v. State, 264 Ga. 319 (Ga. 1994) (de novo review of law applied to undisputed facts; probative law on suppression)
Wood v. State, 214 Ga. App. 848 (Ga. App. 1994) (un corroborated anonymous tips do not establish probable cause)
Harper v. State, 283 Ga. 102 (Ga. 2008) (anonymous third-party tip as 'concerned citizen' requires credible basis)
Davis v. State, 214 Ga. App. 37 (Ga. App. 1994) (informant credibility not established; mere rumor)
Eaton v. State, 210 Ga. App. 273 (Ga. App. 1993) (informant characterized as concerned citizen requires identity and reliability)
Johnson v. State, 265 Ga. App. 777 (Ga. App. 2004) (corroboration of hearsay supports probable cause)
Cochran v. State, 281 Ga. 4 (Ga. 2006) (hearsay can be basis if corroborated by underlying circumstances)
Evans v. State, 263 Ga. App. 572 (Ga. App. 2003) (corroboration requirements and corroborating observations)
Manzione v. State, 312 Ga. App. 638 (Ga. App. 2011) (service-provider reports treated as credible concerned citizen; corroboration emphasized)