Court Opinion

ID: 9623226
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 06:30:03.922003+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:05:27.231468
License: Public Domain

Smith, Judge,
dissenting.
Although I agree with much that is said in Judge Ruffin’s dissent, I cannot agree that the stop of Pace was unlawful under Terry v. Ohio, 392 U. S. 1 (88 SC 1868, 20 LE2d 889) (1968).
I do agree that the officers exceeded the bounds of Terry when they reached into Pace’s pocket without performing a pat-down for weapons. Barrett v. State, 212 Ga. App. 745 (443 SE2d 285) (1994), was decided less than two years ago and presented a similar factual situation. I find any distinctions between this case and Barrett to be without a difference, and I find that this Court’s inconsistent treatment of the two cases renders a disservice not only to Pace, but to the bench and bar. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.
*591Decided December 5, 1995
Reconsideration denied December 20, 1995
Robert L. Wadkins, for appellant.
Douglas C. Pullen, District Attorney, George E. Lipscomb II, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.