Legal Opinion

State v. Peacock

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 4, 1986No. 71583PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Carley, Judge.

In this D.U.I. case, the State appeals from the trial court’s grant of a motion to suppress the evidence of the results of the blood test performed on defendant. The basis of the motion was that the evidence did not show the required reasonable and articulable suspicion necessary to authorize the stopping of defendant. See Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U. S. 648 (99 SC 1391, 59 LE2d 660, 663) (1979); Thomason v. State, 153 Ga. App. 345, 346, 347 (265 SE2d 312) (1980).

The testimony of the officer was to the effect that he had observed defendant bring his vehicle to a stop at least…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Delaware v. ProuseSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Woodruff v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1975
  3. State v. SwiftSupreme Court of Georgia · 1974
  4. State v. ThomasonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
  5. State v. WatersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1984

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. GrimesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1990
  2. State v. AdamsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1988
  3. State v. WhitfieldCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1995
  4. Jamison v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1991
  5. State v. LamotteCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1990

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API