Brown v. State

James B. Brown was charged by accusation with two counts of DUI, failure to maintain lane, and violation of the open container law. After the trial court denied his motion to suppress/motion in limine, he stipulated to the results of field sobriety tests and the State-administered breath test and agreed to a bench trial. He now appeals from his convictions for one count of DUI and the remaining two counts, enumerating as error only the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress/motion in limine. Brown concedes that he had been drinking and that once the stop was made, the Henry County Sheriff’s deputy who stopped him gleaned sufficient evidence to constitute probable cause to arrest him. He contends, however, that because the deputy did not have an articulable suspicion sufficient to authorize the stop, the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress/motion in limine. We do not agree.

It is this court’s duty in reviewing a trial court’s ruling on a motion to suppress to ensure that a substantial basis existed for the trial court’s decision. We are obligated to construe the evidence to support the trial court’s ruling. Stinson v. State , 254 Ga. App. 810 1 564 SE2d 39 2002. The trial court’s order must be affirmed if any evidence supports it, and the trial court’s determination regarding questions of fact is accepted unless it is clearly erroneous. Williams v. State , 254 Ga. App. 8, 11 2 561 SE2d 149 2002.