☢ test - Í

Compliance Division of the Georgia Department of Motor Vehicle Safety (now Department of Public Safety) are “responsible for enforcing federal motor carrier regulations, which have been adopted under Georgia law [fn], and pursuant to its enforcement authority, the Division may stop commercial vehicles for safety inspections without probable cause, [fn]” including passenger buses like the one carrying defendant and his cocaine here. 7. CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, OFFICER’S KNOWLEDGE OF Sims v. State, 335 Ga.App. 625, 782 S.E.2d 687 (February 9, 2016). Interlocutory appeal in prosecution for misdemeanor marijuana possession and obstruction. Trial court properly denied motion to suppress; officer had articulable suspicion to stop Sims and a companion. Officer Cook and other off-duty police worked security at an apartment complex “located in a high crime area plagued by burglaries, robberies, and illegal drug sales, and the Apartments hired Cook and other police officers to provide off-duty security against these criminal activities. … The Apartments specifically asked the off-duty officers to look for non-residents on the Apartments property engaging in criminal activity.” A few days before the incident in question, Cook encountered Sims, a non-resident, smoking marijuana in an apartment, and gave him a warning. In the incident in question, “Officer Cook saw Sims, who he knew was not a resident, and another person he could not identify as a resident, moving about in unusual ways behind various buildings on the Apartments property. Although it was certainly possible that the two men were engaged in innocent conduct, the officer also knew of Sims’s recent involvement with marijuana on the Apartments property, knew of continuing problems with non-residents engaged in criminal activity on the property, and knew of recent burglaries and illegal drug sales on the property. All of this knowledge, along with the officer’s observations, supported reasonable inferences that led him to suspect that Sims and the person with him were engaged in criminal activity on the property. Moreover, when Cook approached Sims and the other person and attempted to determine if the other person was a resident of the Apartments property, Sims told the other person not to answer the officer. This conduct was additional suspicious behavior. Taken together, the circumstances were sufficient to give the officers a particularized and objective basis for reasonable suspicion to stop Sims and the other person to investigate.” Officers were thus entitled to stop Sims when he attempted to walk away from their command to stop. Jackson v. State, 335 Ga.App. 630, 782 S.E.2d 691 (February 9, 2016). Conviction for trafficking in marijuana affirmed. No error in denying motion to suppress; traffic stop wasn’t unduly prolonged. Officer talked to defendant about his travel itinerary and purpose while writing a warning citation and awaiting a criminal history check. By the time the criminal history check “indicated that he was previously charged with drug trafficking,” Jackson had made several statements that gave the officer grounds for suspicion. “We believe that, at the very least, that Jackson’s inconsistent answers as to why he was in Georgia, his inability to recall the location where he had been, his statement that he was exiting the interstate to get gas despite that he had plenty of gas and that gas was cheaper in his home state of Alabama, and the fact that he had passed the only gas station at the exit when he was stopped, considered in totality, provided reasonable articulable suspicion sufficient to allow Deputy Whitehead to broaden his investigation beyond a simple traffic offense. See Rocha v. State, 317 Ga.App. 863, 867(1), 733 S.E.2d 38 (2012); Matthews v. State, 294 Ga.App. 836, 839(1)(b), 670 S.E.2d 520 (2008). This was enhanced when the criminal background check revealed Jackson’s previous drug trafficking charge, and, even further, when he lied about his criminal record. See Sherod v. State, 334 Ga.App. 314, 779 S.E.2d 94 (2015). Thus, we believe that Jackson’s continued detention to allow the drug dog to do a ‘free air’ sniff around of his automobile passes constitutional muster.” Compare Ward (February 28, 2006), below and cases cited thereunder (Defendant’s meaningless lie to officer about her reason for being in parking lot did not, without more, give officer articulable suspicion for stop). Gonzalez v. State, 334 Ga.App. 706, 780 S.E.2d 383 (November 19, 2015). Methamphetamine trafficking and related convictions affirmed; no ineffective assistance in failing to file timely motion to suppress, as officers had articulable suspicion to stop defendant based on report of domestic disturbance. “Detective Eaton determined that the woman outside the residence had reported a domestic disturbance to police, and he observed visibly upset children leaving the residence to speak with the woman. He also observed Gonzalez leave the residence at a high rate of speed, proceeded to follow him, and identified him on the radio as the ‘suspect’ in the domestic disturbance. Meanwhile, Deputy Brunson who had been dispatched to the report of the domestic disturbance observed a vehicle matching the description provided by Detective Eaton on the radio and initiated the stop to determine if the driver were involved in the reported incident.” Analogized to Jones v. State, 314 Ga.App. 107 (722 S.E.2d 918) (2012). “Although the present case did not involve any evidence of gunshots as Jones did, the nature of the domestic disturbance was serious enough that the children on the scene were crying and the woman involved felt compelled to call for police intervention. Thus, the officers had a founded suspicion of possible criminal activity.”