State v. McKennaState v. McKenna
- Reporters:
- ,
- Before:
- Carley
After appellee was charged with driving under the influence, he filed a pre-trial motion to exclude from evidence both a printout showing the results of his Intoximeter test and any testimony with regard thereto. The trial court granted appellee’s motion, based upon its determination that the printout had been materially altered. The order was certified for immediate review and the State appeals from *207 the trial court’s evidentiary ruling pursuant to this court’s grant of its application for interlocutory appeal.
Although this court granted the State’s application for an interlocutory appeal and appellee has not filed a motion to dismiss, “we are required to examine the record to make certain we possess jurisdiction. [Cits.]; Rule 32 (d) of our court ([eit.]) requires that whenever it appears to the court that it has no jurisdiction of a pending appeal, it will be dismissed whenever and however its lack of jurisdiction may appear. [Cit.]” Flowers v. State, 155 Ga. App. 256, 257 (270 SE2d 695) (1980).
The authority of the State to appeal an adverse ruling in a criminal case is controlled by statute. “An appeal may be taken by and on behalf of the State of Georgia ... in criminal cases in the following instances: . . . From an order, decision, or judgment sustaining a motion to suppress evidence
illegally seized
in the case of motions made and ruled upon prior to the impaneling of a jury.” (Emphasis supplied.)
In the instant case, however, appellee’s pre-trial motion did
not
seek the exclusion of any evidence on the ground that it had been
obtained in violation of law.
The exclusion of the test results was based upon the trial court’s finding of a material alteration thereof. Accordingly,
| Appeal dismissed.
Sognier, C. J., and McMurray, P. J., concur.