(Ga. L. 1865-66, p. 235, § 1; Code 1868, § 4617; Code 1873, § 4714; Code 1882, § 4714; Penal Code 1895, § 883; Penal Code 1910, § 904; Code 1933, § 27-103; Code 1933, § 27-103.1, enacted by Ga. L. 1962, p. 668, § 1.)
Law reviews.- For annual survey of death penalty decisions, see 57 Mercer L. Rev. 139 (2005); 58 Mercer L. Rev. 111 (2006).
JUDICIAL DECISIONSANALYSIS
Even if the arrest warrant is invalid, if an arrest is plainly supported by probable cause, the arrest is nonetheless legal. Roberts v. State, 252 Ga. 227, 314 S.E.2d 83, cert. denied, 469 U.S. 873, 105 S. Ct. 228, 83 L. Ed. 2d 157 (1984).
Mistake in citation of statute irrelevant.
- Affidavit given in support of an arrest warrant for the defendant contained all of the required information and was valid; the fact that the affidavit mis-cited the statute that the defendant was accused of violating was irrelevant. Golden v. State, 299 Ga. App. 407, 683 S.E.2d 618 (2009), cert. denied, No. S09C1904, 2010 Ga. LEXIS 56 (Ga.), cert. denied, 560 U.S. 941, 130 S. Ct. 3358, 176 L. Ed. 2d 1250 (2010), overruled on other grounds by Collier v. State, 834 S.E.2d 769, 2019 Ga. LEXIS 708 (Ga. 2019).
Prosecutor not absolutely immune for advising police on filling out affidavit.- Prosecutor was not entitled to absolute immunity for giving legal advice to police officers on how to fill out affidavits for arrest against a complainant who had sworn a warrant application against one of the officers; had the prosecutor signed the affidavit for the arrest personally, the prosecutor would not have received absolute immunity because the document would have been a sworn factual statement. Because the prosecutor's actions were not in preparation of the prosecutor's own case, were not part of the judicial process, and the prosecutor would not have received absolute immunity had the prosecutor signed the documents personally, the district court erred in granting the prosecutor absolute immunity for giving legal advice to the police. Holden v. Sticher, F.3d (11th Cir. May 24, 2011)(Unpublished).
Cited in Dodson v. Grimes, 220 Ga. 269, 138 S.E.2d 311 (1964); Lovett v. State, 111 Ga. App. 295, 141 S.E.2d 595 (1965); Lowe v. Turner, 115 Ga. App. 503, 154 S.E.2d 792 (1967); Shaw v. Jones, 226 Ga. 291, 174 S.E.2d 444 (1970); Kametches v. State, 242 Ga. 721, 251 S.E.2d 232 (1978); Anglin v. State, 244 Ga. 1, 257 S.E.2d 513 (1979); Roth v. Carey, 159 Ga. App. 165, 282 S.E.2d 918 (1981); Myron v. State, 248 Ga. 120, 281 S.E.2d 600 (1981); Pittman v. State, 175 Ga. App. 50, 332 S.E.2d 356 (1985).
Requirements for Affidavit or Warrant
Necessary information for arrest affidavit.
- This section required information by way of affidavit in procuring an arrest warrant as to the offense committed, the county in which committed, the time committed and, when relevant, the person against whom the offense is committed. Nicholson v. United States, 355 F.2d 80 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 974, 86 S. Ct. 1866, 16 L. Ed. 2d 684 (1966).
Affidavits and warrants must comply with statutory information standard.
- This section omitted the "substantial compliance" language formerly used and, hence, requires compliance of affidavits and warrants with the statutory standard of required information. Lowe v. Turner, 115 Ga. App. 503, 154 S.E.2d 792 (1967).
Probable cause is not required for issuance of arrest warrant. Davis v. State, 155 Ga. App. 511, 271 S.E.2d 648 (1980).
Probable cause not applicable to arrest warrants.
- Probable cause requirements of an affidavit on which a search warrant is issued are not applicable to arrest warrants. Smith v. Stynchcombe, 234 Ga. 780, 218 S.E.2d 63 (1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1089, 96 S. Ct. 882, 47 L. Ed. 2d 99 (1976).
Because the defendant was lawfully arrested pursuant to the fifth warrant for the crime of armed robbery, and the warrant was sworn to, signed, and executed, the defendant's arrest was not illegal, and the defendant's fingerprints were not subject to exclusion; moreover, there was no requirement in Georgia that an arrest warrant had to meet the probable cause requirements of an affidavit for a search warrant. Skaggs-Ferrell v. State, 287 Ga. App. 872, 652 S.E.2d 891 (2007).
Arrest legal when affidavit meets statutory requirements.
- When affidavit serving as basis for arrest warrant issued against the defendant satisfies the statutory requirements of O.C.G.A. §§ 17-4-41 and17-4-45, an arrest is not illegal and confessions obtained as the product of such affidavit and arrest are not tainted evidence. Hammond v. State, 157 Ga. App. 647, 278 S.E.2d 188 (1981).
Warrant affidavit complying with O.C.G.A. § 17-4-41 is not alone sufficient to demonstrate the validity of an arrest warrant because probable cause must still be shown to the issuing magistrate. Devier v. State, 253 Ga. 604, 323 S.E.2d 150 (1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1009, 105 S. Ct. 1877, 85 L. Ed. 2d 169 (1985).
All that is required for issuance of an arrest warrant is an affidavit stating the offense; the time, date, and place of occurrence of the offense; the person against whom such offense was committed; and a statement describing the offense, or offenses. Davis v. State, 155 Ga. App. 511, 271 S.E.2d 648 (1980).
Affidavit must give sufficient information.
- Substantial compliance with the provisions of former Penal Code 1910, §§ 904 and 906 (see O.C.G.A. §§ 17-4-41 and17-4-46) with reference to affidavits and warrants for the arrest of offenders against the penal laws, and the form of such warrants, was all that was required. Kumpe v. Hall, 167 Ga. 284, 145 S.E. 509 (1928).
Affidavit in support of a battery defendant's arrest was sufficient since the affidavit stated that the defendant committed the battery at a given time, date, and place, and the affidavit stated that the defendant intentionally caused physical harm to the victim by choking and hitting the victim with the defendant's fists. Dunn v. State, 234 Ga. App. 623, 507 S.E.2d 170 (1998).
Requirements for affidavits satisfied.
- Defendant's plea counsel did not render ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to challenge the legality of arrest warrants because all four of the supporting affidavits unquestionably satisfied the requirements of O.C.G.A. § 17-4-41(a), and based on the information provided in the supporting affidavits, the officer in the case supplied the issuing magistrate with sufficient information to support an independent finding that probable cause existed for the issuance of the warrants; the defendant failed to demonstrate that the defendant's plea counsel's failure to challenge the legality of the warrants prejudiced the defendant because even if counsel had challenged the warrants and was able to suppress any inculpatory statement the defendant made, there was nothing to suggest that the defendant's guilty plea resulted from such a statement. Murray v. State, 307 Ga. App. 621, 705 S.E.2d 726 (2011).
Only name of offense necessary, not details.
- Under the former provisions of this section, it was only necessary to name the offense committed by the defendant, in the affidavit and warrant, and it was not necessary to set out the facts which constitute the offense. McAlpin v. Purse, 86 Ga. 271, 12 S.E. 412 (1890); Brown v. State, 109 Ga. 570, 34 S.E. 1031 (1900); Tollison v. George, 153 Ga. 612, 112 S.E. 896 (1922).
Affidavit naming crime and warrant citing "misdemeanor."
- When an affidavit upon which a criminal warrant was founded stated that the accused did commit the offense of a misdemeanor by disposing of a radio upon which another held mortgage, and the warrant stated that the accused "did commit the offense of misdemeanor," the affidavit and warrant were sufficient to charge a crime. Cain v. Kendrick, 199 Ga. 147, 33 S.E.2d 417, answer conformed to, 72 Ga. App. 392, 33 S.E.2d 883 (1945).
Affidavit need only give date and county of crime.
- This section did not require the exact time of day or the specific location in the county to be given. It was sufficient to state the date the alleged offense was committed and the county in which the offense allegedly occurred. Courtenay v. Randolph, 125 Ga. App. 581, 188 S.E.2d 396 (1972); Lyle v. State, 131 Ga. App. 8, 205 S.E.2d 126 (1974).
Warrant void without time and place of offense.
- Warrant that does not allege when or where the crime was committed is void. Thorpe v. Wray, 68 Ga. 359 (1882).
Omitting time does not invalidate warrant.
- Failure to state the time of commission is a mere technical defect and does not void the warrant. Courtenay v. Randolph, 125 Ga. App. 581, 188 S.E.2d 396 (1972); Thompson v. State, 142 Ga. App. 888, 237 S.E.2d 419, rev'd on other grounds, 240 Ga. 296, 240 S.E.2d 87 (1977).
Standard accusation form sufficient with affidavit for arrest.
- Standard printed affidavit and accusation form, accompanied by a previously prepared affidavit for arrest, is legally sufficient. Faulkner v. State, 146 Ga. App. 604, 247 S.E.2d 147 (1978).
No arrest affidavit on record makes standard accusation insufficient.
- Standard printed affidavit and accusation form is insufficient when no affidavit for arrest is included in the record. Faulkner v. State, 146 Ga. App. 604, 247 S.E.2d 147 (1978).
Merely charging "misdemeanor" insufficient.
- Accusation supported only by an affidavit charging the commission of a "misdemeanor" and not naming the specific offense is legally insufficient. Faulkner v. State, 146 Ga. App. 604, 247 S.E.2d 147 (1978).
Misdemeanor accusation did not have to be based on arrest warrant.
- There was no merit to a defendant's argument that reversal of the defendant's theft by deception conviction was required because the arrest warrant was not supported by a sufficient affidavit under O.C.G.A. § 17-4-41. Because the defendant had not identified any evidence obtained as a result of the arrest, a new trial was not required; moreover, a misdemeanor accusation did not have to be based on an arrest warrant. Bruster v. State, 291 Ga. App. 490, 662 S.E.2d 265 (2008).
Accusation incorporated by reference not sufficient.
- Affidavit which sets forth only that the defendant has committed the offense of misdemeanor and purports to incorporate by reference the substance of an accusation does not serve as the basis for an accusation and does not comport with this section. Bickley v. State, 150 Ga. App. 669, 258 S.E.2d 306 (1979).
Additional information needed if reliance on informer.
- If reliance under this section was based on an informer, the affidavit submitted must contain sufficient facts to show: (1) reasons for the informer's reliability; (2) that the affidavit either specifically states how the informant obtained the informant's information or describes the alleged criminal activity in such detail that the magistrate may know that it is more than a casual rumor circulating in the underworld or an accusation based merely on an individual's general reputation; and (3) that the information is not stale. Dailey v. State, 136 Ga. App. 866, 222 S.E.2d 682 (1975).
Counsel found ineffective when affidavits deficient.
- Defendant's trial counsel was ineffective after counsel failed to make minimal inquiries which would have revealed that the arrest of the defendant was predicated on warrants issued without any showing of probable cause before the issuing magistrate; the warrants for defendant's arrest were apparently issued solely on the basis of the attached affidavits which, although satisfying the requirements of O.C.G.A. § 17-4-41, did not supply the magistrate with sufficient judgment that probable cause existed for the issuance of the warrants. Pitts v. State, 209 Ga. App. 47, 432 S.E.2d 643 (1993).
Remedies for unjustified arrest.
- If the plaintiff was arrested under a void warrant, the action is for false imprisonment; if the warrant is valid, malicious prosecution is the remedy. Courtenay v. Randolph, 125 Ga. App. 581, 188 S.E.2d 396 (1972).
Verbal error not fatal if affidavit upholds warrant.
- Mere verbal inaccuracy will not, if the meaning is clear, vitiate an affidavit or warrant, but the affidavit must uphold the warrant. Dickson v. State, 62 Ga. 583 (1879).
For larceny (now theft) affidavit held sufficient in city court trial, see Taylor v. State, 120 Ga. 484, 48 S.E. 158 (1904).
For misdemeanor properly charged in affidavit, see Williams v. State, 107 Ga. 693, 33 S.E. 641 (1899).
For proper allegation of assault with intent to murder, see Sasser v. McDaniel, 73 Ga. 547 (1884).
Arrest warrant for murder supported by probable cause.
- Arrest warrant for murder was supported by probable cause as the record clearly showed that the magistrate issuing the warrant was provided the officer's affidavit and was informed by the same officer that a surviving victim had identified the appellant from a photographic line-up as one of the shooters and the appellant's identification and use of a gun during the shooting was corroborated by the facts and circumstances officers had gathered from witnesses and evidence at the scene of the shooting. Williams v. State, 298 Ga. 538, 783 S.E.2d 594 (2016).
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Signature in presence of magistrate.
- Affidavit which is prepared to support an accusation must be signed by the arresting officer in the presence of a magistrate or anyone else who has authority to issue criminal warrants. 1980 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U80-2.
Multiple criminal charges in single warrant.
- At the present time, multiple criminal charges may be contained on a single arrest warrant provided that the requirements of O.C.G.A. § 17-4-41 are met and that the affidavit contains probable cause as to any charge alleged in the warrant. 1986 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U86-24.
RESEARCH REFERENCES
Am. Jur. 2d.
- 5 Am. Jur. 2d, Arrest, § 10 et seq.
C.J.S.- 22 C.J.S., Criminal Procedure and Rights of the Accused, § 18 et seq. 98 C.J.S., Witnesses, § 778.
ALR.
- Territorial extent of power to arrest under a warrant, 61 A.L.R. 377.
Electrical energy, gas, water, heat, power as subject of larceny, 113 A.L.R. 1282.