SECOND DI VI SI ON
M I LLER, P. J.

, A N DREWS and SELF, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a l s .us /r ule s

Febr uar y 22, 2018



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 8 A0 73 0 . BOOTH v

. THE STATE.

A1 8 A0 73 1 . STAM EY v . THE STATE.

A1 8 A0 73 2 . POW ELL v

. THE STATE

A1 8 A0 73 3 . M E DINA v

. THE STATE

A1 8 A0 73 4 . J O NES v . THE STATE.

A1 8 A0 73 5 . BOSW ELL v . STATE.

S E LF , J u d g e.

In each o f t h es e ap p eal s , we are cal l ed up o n t o ad d r es s t h e s am e i s s u e b as ed

u p o n i d en t ical fact s : w h et h er t h e t ri al co u rt er r ed b y d en y in g ap p el l an t s’ m o t i o n to

s u p p res s g ro u nd ed u p o n t h e St at e’ s fai l u re t o i m m ed i at el y p res en t wi ret ap reco rd i ng s

fo r seal i n g as req u ired b y fed eral l aw. See 1 8 USC § 2 5 18 (8 ) (a). F o r t h e reas on s

ex p lai n ed b el o w , we affi rm

.On ap p eal

, w e accep t t h e fi n d i n g s o f t h e t ri al co urt on q u es t i o n s o f

d i s p u t ed fact u n l es s t h o s e fi n d in g s are cl earl y e r r o n eo u s

. W e o we n o

d eferen ce, h o wev er, t o t h e t ri al co u rt o n q ues t i o n s o f law, an d we m u s t

d e ci d e fo r o u rs el v es wh et h er t he fact s sh o w a fai l u re t o i m m ed i a t e l y

p res en t t h e reco rd i ng s fo r s eal i ng an d, i f s o, a s at i s fact o ry ex p l an at i o n

fo r t h at fai l u re.

Fi n n ey v. S t a t e , 2 9 8 Ga. 6 2 0

, 6 2 2

, n. 5 (7 83 SE2 d 5 9 8 ) (2 0 1 6 ). Th e reco rd s h o ws t h at

o n J u n e 1 9

, 2 0 1 5

, a Sp al d i n g Co u n t y s u p eri o r co u rt ju d g e si gn ed t h ree s ep arat e o rd ers

au t h o ri zi n g wi ret ap s o n cel l p h o n es b el o n g i n g t o Ad ri an Leh st en

. On J u n e 2 1

, 2 0 1 5,

ap p ro x i m at el y t wo week s b efo re t h e o rd ers we r e s c h e d u l ed to ex p i re, Leh s t en was

arres t ed i n Lam ar Co u n t y

. Th e n ex t d ay , t he p o l ice l earn ed of h i s arres t an d “ h ad to

k i n d o f s cram

b l e an d ex ecu t e . . . fo u r t o fi v e s earch warran t s ” at “ t h e res i d en ces o f

o t h er k n own co -co n sp i rat o rs

. ” Th ey al s o s t o p p ed t h e el ect ro n i c s u rv ei l l an ce s i nce

Leh st en “ was n o l o n g er u s i ng hi s p h o ne b ecau s e h e was i n jai l .” A n arco t i cs o ffi cer

recei v ed t h e reco rd i n g s o n J u n e 2 4

, 2 0 1 5. On J u ly 2

, t h e ju d g e wh o i ss u ed t he wi ret ap

o rd ers s i g n ed an o rd er s eal i n g t h e reco rd i n g s.

In M arch 2 0 1 7

, t h e St at e i n d i ct ed

, am o n g ot h er s , t h e s i x ap p el l an t s i n t h i s

ap p eal (Darry l Kei t h B ooth, T r e nton M at t h ew St am ey , Am b er Ch eri e Po wel l

, Tam

m y

L o u i s e M ed i n a, An t h o n y W ad e J o n es , an d Ch ri s ti na M ari e Bo s wel l ) fo r v ari o u s

2cri m es , i n cl u d in g i l l eg al u s e o f a co m m u n i ca t i o n faci l it y

. 1 Each o f t h e ap p el l an t s , wh o

a re al l rep res en ted b y t h e s am e at t orn ey , fi l ed i d en t i cal m ot i o n s t o s u p p res s “ a l l

ev i d en ce res ul ti n g fro m an u nl awfu l wi ret ap ” b as ed u p o n t h e St at e’ s d el ay in s eal i n g

t h e reco rd i n gs

. Fo l l o wi n g a c o n s o l i dat ed h eari n g fo r al l s ix cas es , t h e t ri al co u rt

d en ied t h e m o ti o n s t o su p pres s

.

1

. In Geo rg i a, a s u p eri o r co u rt ju dg e m ay i s su e a warran t perm i tt i n g a wi ret ap

“ fo r t h e s u rv ei l l an ce o f a p ers o n o r p l ace t o t h e ex t en t th e s am e i s co n s i st en t wi t h an d

s u b ject t o t h e t erm s , co n di t i o n s , an d p ro ced u res pro v i ded b y 1 8 U .S.C. Ch ap t er 1 1 9.”

OCGA § 1 6 -1 1 -6 4 (c). 1 8 U SC § 2 5 1 8 (8 ) (a) m an d at es t h at “ [i ] m m ed i at el y u p o n t h e

ex p irat i o n o f th e p eri od o f t h e ord er [au t h o ri zi n g i n t ercep t i o n of wi re, o ral

, o r

el ect ro ni c co m

m un icat i o n s ]

, o r e x t en s i on s th ereo f, su ch reco rd in g s s h al l b e m ad e

av ai l ab l e t o t he ju d g e i s s u i n g s u ch o rd er an d s eal ed u nd er h i s d i rect i o n s.”

[T] h e g o v ern m en t m ay n o t u s e o r d i s cl o s e t h e co n t en t o f an y in t ercep ted

co m m u n i c at i o n o r an y ev i den ce d eri v ed t h erefro m i n a ju d i ci al

p ro ceed i n g , u nl es s t h ere ap p ears a “ s a t i s fact ory ex p lan at i on ” fo r th e

fai l u re t o m ak e an im

m ed i at e p r e s en t at i o n o f t he reco rd i ng s

. A

“ s at i s fact o ry ex pl an at io n” i s o ne t h at “ ex p l a i n s n o t o n l y wh y a d el ay

1 Leh s t en was ch arg ed wi t h v i ol at i o n s o f Geo rg i a’ s Rack et eer In fl u en ced an d
Co rru p t Org an izat i o n s Act in co n n ect i o n wi t h t h e po s s es s i o n o f co n t r o l l ed

s u b s t an ces

.

3o ccu rred bu t al s o w hy i t i s ex cu sab l e.” Un i t ed St a t es v. O j ed a Ri o s , 4 9 5

U. S. 2 5 7, 2 6 5 (1 1 0 SCt 1 8 4 5 , 1 0 9 LE2 d 2 2 4 ) (1 9 9 0).

(Fo o tn o te o m i t t ed .) Fi nn ey , 2 9 8 Ga. at 6 2 0

.

In No r th v. S t a te
, 25 0 Ga. Ap p

. 6 22 (5 5 2 SE2 d 5 54 ) (2 0 0 1), we ad d res s ed “ t h e

p ro b lem at i c q u es t i o n o f wh et h er a s eal i n g d el ay m u s t b e cal cu l at ed f

ro m t h e

ex p irat i o n d at e o f t he w arran t o r t h e d at e t h at th e t ap i s act ual l y term i n at e d

, w h e r e

s u c h d a t e p r eced es t h e ex p i rat i o n d at e on t he wi ret ap ord er.” Id

. at 6 2 4 (1 ). Aft er

ex am i n i n g 1 8 USC § 2 5 1 8 (8 ) (a), we co n cl u d ed t h at “ th e s tat u t e, o n i t s face, req u i res

i m m ed i at e s eal i n g o n l y aft er ‘ t h e ex p i rat i o n o f t h e p eri o d o f t h e o r d er , o r ex t en s i on s

t h ereo f.’ ” ( E m

p h a s i s i n o ri g in al .) Id

. at 6 2 4

. Acco rd i n g l y , we ap p l i ed “ t h e p l ai n

l an g u ag e o f t h e s t at u t e” an d fo u n d t h at t h e reco rd i n g s “ were ad m i s s i b l e becau s e t h ey

were s eal ed b y t h e ju d g e o n th e d at e t h at t h e wi ret ap p i n g o rd er t erm i n at ed .” Id

. In

Fi n n ey , su p ra, t h e Su prem e Co u rt o f G eo rg i a reco g n i zed two n o nb i n d i n g fed eral

d eci s i o n s t o t h e co n t rary , b u t as s u m ed

, “ [w] i t h o u t d eci d i n g

. . . t h at t h e St at e n eed

o n l y ex p l ai n t h e d el ay fo l l owi n g t h e ex p i rat i o n o f th e Ti t l e III au t h o ri zat i o n

. ” 2 2 9 8

Ga. at 6 2 3

, n

. 6

. Bas ed u p o n i t s co n cl u si o n t h at t h e St at e “ fai l ed to ad eq u at el y ex p l ai n

2 “ T i t l e III” refers t o Ti t l e III o f t h e Om n i bu s Cri m e Co n t ro l an d Safe St reet s Act o f 1 96 8, co d i fi ed at 1 8 USC 2 5 1 0 et s eq ., o f w h i ch 1 8 USC 2 5 1 8 (8 ) (a) i s a p art

.

4t h e d el ay fo l l o wi n g th e ex p irat io n o f t h e Ti t l e III , au t h o ri zat i o n,” i t d et erm i n ed t h at

i t “ need n o t co ns i d er wh et h er an ex p l an at i o n al s o i s req ui red fo r t h e p eri o d b et ween

t h e co n cl u s i o n o f s u rv ei ll an ce an d t h e ex p irat i o n o f t he Ti t l e III au t h o ri zat i o n .” 3 Id

.

In t h i s cas e, t h e reco rd sh o ws t h at t he d i s cs w e r e creat ed Ju n e 24

, 2 0 1 5

, t h e

i s su i ng ju d g e s i g n ed an o rd er s eal i n g t h e d is cs o n J ul y 2 , 2 0 1 5 , an d t h e au t h o ri zi n g

o rd er ex p i red aro u n d J u l y 6

, 2 0 1 5

. Bas ed u p o n th e b in d i n g p reced en t o f o u r d eci s i o n

i n No r t h

, s u p ra, we co n cl ud e t h at t h e St at e n eed n o t p ro v i d e an ex p l an at i o n o f t h e

d el ay b et ween t h e s eal in g an d t h e d at e t h e au t h ori zi n g o rd er ex p i red

. As t h e ev i d en ce

s h o ws t h at t h e reco rd in g s w ere s eal ed b efo re t h e ex p irat i o n o f t h e au t h o ri zi n g o rd er, 4

we affi rm t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er d en y i n g t h e ap p el l an t s ’ m o t i o n t o s u p p res s

.

2

. Ou r h o l d i n g i n Di v i s i o n 1 ren d ers ap pel l an t s ’ rem ai n i n g en um erat i o n o f

erro r m o o t

.

Ju d g men t af fi r med

. An d

r ews
, J., co n cu r

. Mi ll er
, P. J., co n cu r f

u l l y a n d

s p eci a l l y.

3 Th e Su p rem e Co u rt d i d n o t ack n o wl ed g e o ur deci s i o n i n No r th

, s u p ra, wh en i t di s cu s s ed t h i s i ss ue.

4 W e n o t e t h at t h i s Co u rt i s n o t b o u n d b y th e St at e’ s co n ces s i o n i n t h e m o t i o n
t o s u p p res s h eari n g t h at i t was l eg al l y req u i red t o p ro vi d e an ex p lan at i o n f o r t h e d el ay

. See Tez en o v. St a t e , 3 4 3 Ga. Ap p

. 62 3

, 6 28 (1 ) (a), n. 3 (8 08 SE2 d 6 4 ) (2 0 1 7 );

Fr a nkl in v. Ea ves , 3 3 7 Ga. Ap p . 2 9 2, 2 98 (2 ) (7 8 7 SE2 d 2 65 ) (2 0 1 6 ).

5A1 8 A0 73 0 . BOOTH v

. THE STATE.

A1 8 A0 73 1 . STAM EY v . THE STATE.

A1 8 A0 73 2 . POW ELL v

. THE STATE.

A1 8 A0 73 3 . M E DINA v

. THE STATE.

A1 8 A0 73 4 . J O NES v . THE STATE.

A1 8 A0 73 5 . BOSW ELL v . THE STATE.

M I LLE R , Pres i d i n g J u d g e, co ncu rri n g fu l l y an d s peci al l y

.

I ag ree t h at

, un d er o u r p reced en t

, t h e tri al co u rt w as n o t req u i red t o s u p p res s

t h e ev i d en ce i n t h i s cas e, an d I co n cu r fu ll y i n t he m ajo ri ty o p i n i o n. See No rt h

, s u p ra,

2 5 0 Ga. Ap p

. at 6 24 (1 ). I wri t e s ep arat el y t o em p h as i ze t h at o u r Su p rem e Co u rt h as

6ex p res s l y d ecl i n ed t o d eci d e t h i s p reci s e si tu at i o n

– wh ere t h e s urv ei l lan ce ceas ed

p ri o r t o t h e ex p i rat i o n o f t h e warran t

. See Fi n n ey , s u p ra, 2 9 8 Ga. a t 6 2 3 n

. 6.

M o reo v er, as o u r Su p rem e Co u rt n o t e d

, s o m e fed eral co u rt s h av e h el d t h at t h e

reco rd i n g s m

u s t be p res en t ed i m

m ed i at el y “ as s o o n as pract ical aft er th e s urv ei l l an ce

en d s,” reg ard l es s o f wh et h er t h e warran t h ad ex p i red at th at ti m e. See Fi n n ey , s u p ra,

2 9 8 Ga. at 6 2 3 n

. 6 ; Un i ted S t a t es v. Co n ey , 4 0 7 F3 d 8 7 1

, 8 7 5 (7 t h Ci r, 2 0 0 5 ); Un i t ed

S t a t es v. W

i l l i a ms , 1 2 4 F3 d 4 1 1 , 4 2 9 (IX) (3 d Ci r. 1 9 9 7).

Th e p u rp o s e o f t h is i m

m ed iacy req u i rem en t i s t o en s u r e t h e rel i ab i l i t y an d

i n t eg ri t y o f t he reco rd i n g s b y es t ab l i s h i n g th at t h ey h av e n ot b een t am p ered wi t h p ri o r

t o t h ei r a d m i s s i o n a t t ri al

. See Un i t ed S ta t es v. Oj ed a Ri os , 4 95 U S 2 5 7

, 2 6 3 (1 1 0

SCt 1 84 5

, 1 0 9 LE2 d 22 4 ) (1 9 9 0 ). W h ere t h e i n t ercep t i o n cea s e s p r i o r t o t h e

t erm i n at i o n o f t h e warran t

, t h i s g o al i s m et o n l y b y req u i ri ng t h e g o v ern m en t to

p res en t t h e reco rd s i m

m ed i at el y aft er t h e su rv ei l l an ce en d s , a n d n o t at s o m e l at er

p o i n t w h en t h e warran t ex pi res

. I t hu s qu es t io n wh et h er o u r p reced en t co m p ort s wi th

t h e p u rp o s es an d i nt en t i o n s o f t h e fed eral wi ret ap s t a t u t e i d en t ifi ed in Oj ed a Ri o ,

s u p ra, 4 9 5 U S at 2 6 3

. N ev e r t h e l e s s , as ou r co urt has s po k en , I ag ree wi t h t h e

m ajo ri ty ’ s co n cl u si o n i n t hi s cas e.

7