Edmond v. State

The officers had probable cause to stop the defendant's vehicle based on the collective knowledge theory and the particularity with which a BOLO described the vehicle.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Leemil Dureya Edmond appeals following a bench trial at which he was found guilty of trafficking in cocaine, possession of a controlled substance, and obstruction of an officer. Edmond claims that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence found during a search of his vehicle. After reviewing the record, we conclude there was no error and affirm. The only testimony at the hearing on the motion to suppress was that of the arresting officer. Officer Tatroe testified that on the day in question he attended a briefing session before he began his shift. Tatroe said that he was told to be on the lookout for a maroon Ford Explorer with two African-American males inside. The SUV had been stopped the night before and one of the occupants had run away, throwing down illegal drugs as he did so.

As Tatroe was patrolling the same area in which the Explorer was stopped the night before, he saw a maroon Ford Explorer with two African-American males inside and a drive-out tag with the same date as the one described to him earlier. The officer pulled the Explorer over and approached Edmond, who was driving. The officer asked for identification and told Edmond that he was looking for the suspect who ran away from police the night before. The officer asked for Edmond’s identification and a check of Edmond’s driver’s license showed that there was an outstanding warrant for him in Fulton County. While the warrant was being checked, the officer asked Edmond about the passenger in his SUV the night before, and Edmond said “he didn’t know anything about that” and that he only knew the person’s nickname. The officer asked Edmond if he had any drugs in the vehicle and Edmond said that he did not. Officer Tatroe asked if he could search the vehicle and Edmond gave him permission to do so. The officer found contraband1 hidden inside a cologne gift set box. Edmond struggled with the officers before they were able to eventually subdue him and take him into custody.

Edmond v. State

The officers had probable cause to stop the defendant's vehicle based on the collective knowledge theory and the particularity with which a BOLO described the vehicle.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report