Polk v. State

The totality of the circumstances, supported the denial of the defendant's motion to suppress.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Following a stipulated bench trial,1 the trial court found Christopher D. Polk guilty of driving under the influence of alcohol —less safe OCGA § 40-6-391 a 1 and failure to maintain lane OCGA § 40-6-48 1.2 On appeal, Polk challenges the denial of his motion to suppress. Finding no error, we affirm. In reviewing a trial court’s decision on a motion to suppress, “the evidence is construed most favorably to uphold the findings and judgment of the trial court; the trial court’s findings on disputed facts and credibility are adopted unless they are clearly erroneous and will not be disturbed if there is any evidence to support them.” Footnote omitted. Stearnes v. State , 261 Ga. App. 522, 524 2 583 SE2d 195 2003.

So viewed, the evidence adduced at the hearing on the motion to suppress shows that on October 13, 2007, Forsyth County Officer Christopher Hall was travelling northbound on Post Road near the Vickery subdivision when he observed Polk’s vehicle pull out of the subdivision. As Polk entered the intersection at Majors Road, the vehicle’s tires were “spinning” as the vehicle “kicked its rear end sideways to the right” and abruptly turned on to Post Road, in a northbound direction. As he did so, Polk failed to maintain his lane as he entered Post Road. The officer followed Polk’s vehicle and observed it travel over the right-hand side of his lane and on top of the fog lane, then weave across to the center line and on top of it, breaking “the plane of the outermost edge of the center line.” During this maneuver, Polk struck at least one lane marker before drifting back over to, and on top of, the fog line. After Polk’s vehicle weaved a second time in this manner and made an abrupt stop before making a wide turn on to Bentley Road, the officer stopped Polk for failure to maintain lane and “laying drags.” The officer asked Polk to step out of the vehicle and had him perform field sobriety tests. Based on his performance, Polk was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol. A videotape of the traffic stop was admitted into evidence.

Polk v. State

The totality of the circumstances, supported the denial of the defendant's motion to suppress.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report