Darius Otto Crumpton was charged with possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and possession of an illegal substance within 1000 feet of a housing project. The trial court granted Crumpton’s motion to suppress the contraband, and the State appeals. On appeal from a ruling on a motion to suppress, we must construe the evidence most favorably to affirming the trial court’s factual findings and judgment. We accept the trial court’s factual and credibility determination unless they are clearly erroneous, and the factual findings will be upheld if they are supported by any evidence. The trial court’s application of the law to the undisputed facts, however, is subject to a de novo standard of review. Citations omitted. Peterson v. State , 294 Ga. App. 128, 129 1 668 SE2d 544 2008. State v. Hogans , __Ga. App.__ Case No. A09A1455, decided November 20, 2009. So viewed, the evidence presented at the motion to suppress hearing, including the video recording of the stop, shows the following: The arresting officer, Sergeant Frank Swanson, testified that at about 1:00 a.m. on October 31, 2008, he was on patrol with his partner when he saw Crumpton driving alone. Swanson recognized Crumpton because he had looked for him on outstanding warrants in the past; Swanson also knew Crumpton had been incarcerated for burglary after being convicted of that crime in another county where Swanson had previously been employed. And several months previous to the incident here, Swanson had assisted in a drug investigation involving Crumpton, but that investigation was concluded without Crumpton being arrested. Despite Swanson’s knowledge of Crumpton’s criminal history, however, he could not recall ever personally arresting Crumpton and the only knowledge he had of Crumpton allegedly being involved with illegal drugs arose out of the earlier investigation that concluded without an arrest.
Swanson testified that when he saw Crumpton on the night of the incident here, the first thing that caught his attention was that Crumpton seemed to be turning away so that the occupants of the patrol car could not see his face. He then noticed Crumpton move across two lanes of traffic and turn into the parking lot of an assisted living home. After Crumpton slowly circled the parking lot, Swanson, who had positioned his vehicle so he could watch Crumpton, got behind Crumpton as he drove back out onto the street. Swanson noticed that half of Crumpton’s rear tail light was out, so he activated his lights and pulled Crumpton over.1
