Court Opinion

ID: 9853994
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 05:58:58.274037+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:52.097383
License: Public Domain

Evans, Judge,
concurring specially.
I concur fully with the judgment of affirmance.
But as to Division 4, let it be pointed out that the facts of the case sub judice and that of State v. Luke, 232 Ga. 815, supra, were entirely different from those facts disclosed in Lane v. State, 126 Ga. App. 375 (5), 376 (190 SE2d 576). Here, the defendant was seen removing something from under his arm and placing it in the glove compartment. When arrested, he was found to have been armed with a hidden underarm holster. Under these circumstances, the pistol was proper evidence as to the circumstances connected with the arrest. The facts of this case are entirely different from those in Lane v. State, 126 Ga. App. 375 (5), 376, supra, which is cited by the *391defendant in support of his contention that the pistol was not properly admitted in evidence.