Causey v. State
Causey v. State
Opinion of the Court
Steve Jack Causey appeals from the overruling of his plea in abatement, his motion to suppress evidence and the revocation of his probation. We affirm.
1. Causey’s arguments in his plea of abatement
2. Nor has Causey shown how the affidavit contained in the search warrant is insufficient, alleging only that it "does not meet the requirements of Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U. S. 108 (84 SC 1509, 12 LE2d 723) (1964).” From our review of the record we conclude that " 'The affiant here showed ample facts to authorize the issuing magistrate to conclude that there was probable cause to believe that a crime of the nature set forth in the affidavits had been committed and that evidence of the crime would be produced by a search of the premises described in the affidavits. The fact that much of the affiant’s information was derived from informants would not vitiate the warrant.’ [Cits.]” Baxter v. State, 134 Ga. App. 286, 289 (1) (214 SE2d 578) (1975). The motion to suppress evidence taken during the subsequent search was properly denied.
3. Remaining enumerations urging that the trial court erred in revoking Causey’s probation based upon the evidence presented at the revocation hearing are likewise not sustainable. The evidence showed that a reliable informant told police that Causey told him he and his wife had gotten in a quantity of marijuana, "to come on
Judgment affirmed.
Based iipon his construction of Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U. S. 471 (92 SC 2593, 33 LE2d 484) (1972) and Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U. S. 778 (93 SC 1756, 36 LE2d 665) (1973).
Reference
- Full Case Name
- CAUSEY v. State
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published