Williams v. State
316 Ga. App. 383
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Williams was convicted after a jury trial of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine (OCGA § 16-13-30 (b)).
- On appeal, Williams contends his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to file a timely motion to suppress evidence obtained during a warrant execution.
- Police executed a search warrant at Williams and co-defendant's residence based on information from a confidential informant, yielding 11.01 grams of methamphetamine, digital scales, and packaging material.
- The trial court refused to consider a late-filed suppression motion; the jury returned a guilty verdict.
- The court held that Williams failed to show prejudice from the untimely suppression motion; the informant observed methamphetamine at the residence and had a reliable history, supporting probable cause; thus, suppression would not have been granted and there was no ineffective assistance of counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was trial counsel deficient for not filing a timely suppression motion? | Williams argues counsel's failure was deficient. | State maintains no deficiency, given probable cause and taint-free record. | No reversible error; no prejudice shown. |
| Was there probable cause to issue the search warrant based on the informant’s information? | Informant unreliable and inadequately knowledgeable; no corroboration. | Informant personally observed meth at the residence; reliability shown; sufficient basis for probable cause. | Probable cause established; suppression not warranted. |
| Did the informant’s reliability and knowledge suffice to establish probable cause without independent corroboration? | Uncorroborated informant tips cannot establish probable cause. | Informant’s personal observation and timely tip, plus prior reliability, suffice. | Reliability supported; probable cause affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. State, 311 Ga. App. 405 (2011) (ineffective assistance where suppression motion would have been granted)
- Rocha v. State, 284 Ga. App. 852 (2007) (informant’s knowledge basis strong when personally observed contraband)
- Zorn v. State, 291 Ga. App. 613 (2008) (informant reliability supported by recent tips and prior accuracy)
- Williams v. State, 303 Ga. App. 222 (2010) (informant reliability and basis of knowledge established)
- Land v. State, 259 Ga. App. 860 (2003) (probable cause review gives deference to magistrate's finding)
- Thrasher v. State, 300 Ga. App. 154 (2009) (ineffective assistance analysis in suppression context)