GA: “Buy-Bust” produced no buy, but undercover officer froze the scene and let others in, and that violated Fourth Amendment

Undercover officers attempted to make a buy from the defendant on the street, but it failed because he refused to deal with him. Another attempt was made by another officer to make a buy out of defendant’s house, and the officer came and knocked. The door was locked, and somebody other than the defendant let him inside. Once inside, the officer saw the defendant watching TV and asked about buying $100 of powder cocaine. The defendant was reticent to deal with him, although there were drugs on the coffee table. After a mildly incriminating conversation, the defendant still refused to sell to the officer, so a signal was given and others entered to freeze the scene pending a search warrant. This entry was unconstitutional. State v. Goodman, 290 Ga. App. 196, 660 S.E.2d 21 (2008):

Here, as noted by the trial court in its order, Roberson appeared on the doorstep of Goodman’s home unannounced and uninvited; the door was closed and locked; another officer had earlier been rebuffed when he attempted to buy drugs from Goodman at the home; a third party allowed Roberson into the home; and Goodman appeared cautious and unwilling to sell drugs to Roberson after he entered the home.

There was nothing in the record to indicate that Goodman ever consented to Roberson’s entry into his home or that Delgado was in any way authorized by him to allow such entry. See Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U. S. 103, 114 (D) (126 S. Ct. 1515, 164 LE2d 208) (2006) (Consent of co-habiting spouse unavailing in face of objection by defendant.); Smithson v. State, 275 Ga. App. 591, 594(1) (621 SE2d 783) (2005). Therefore, the trial court correctly found that Roberson’s entry into Goodman’s home was in violation of the Fourth Amendment. See State v. Kuhnhausen, ___ Ga. App. ___, 2008 Ga. App. LEXIS 126 (Case No. A07A2489, decided February 4, 2008).