The State appeals from the trial court’s grant of the motion to suppress of Phillip and Doris Towe. Phillip Towe was charged with four counts of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon involving the following weapons: a Ruger .22 long rifle caliber Mark II target semi-automatic handgun Count 3; a Model 60 Ruger Marlin .22 long rifle caliber semi-automatic rifle Count 4; a Savage 270 caliber, Model 110 rifle Count 5; and a Model SB 12 gauge shotgun Count 6. He was also charged with one count of making a false statement to Department of Natural Resources officers Seitz and Chastain and as a recidivist. His wife, Doris Towe, was charged with making a false statement to the officers.
In determining probable cause for a search warrant, the magistrate is merely to ‘make a practical, common-sense decision whether, given all the circumstances set forth in the affidavit before the magistrate, including the “veracity” and “basis of knowledge” of persons supplying hearsay information, there is a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place.’ DeYoung v. State, 268 Ga. 780, 787 7 493 SE2d 157 1997, quoting State v. Stephens, 252 Ga. 181, 182 311 SE2d 823 1984. The trial court will then examine the issue, and its factual findings regarding probable cause for issuance of the warrant will be upheld unless clearly erroneous. Bryant v. State, 268 Ga. 616, 618 6 491 SE2d 320 1997; Williams v. State, 267 Ga. 771 4 482 SE2d 288 1997. Ultimately, this Court’s role on review is to ‘determine if the magistrate had a “substantial basis” for concluding that probable cause existed to issue the search warrant.’ DeYoung at 787 7. See also Grier v. State, 266 Ga. 170, 172 2 b 465 SE2d 655 1996. And a reviewing court is to give substantial deference to the magistrate’s decision to issue a search warrant after finding probable cause. Id.