UNDERWOOD v. STATE (2024)

We granted certiorari primarily to address the question of whether suppression of evidence is an available remedy for violations of OCGA § 17-5-27. However, after reviewing the full record in this case, we have concluded that we cannot reach that legal issue. Specifically, after careful consideration of the full record, the briefs of the parties, and oral argument, we cannot say that the trial court erred when it concluded that law enforcement's entry into Petitioner's house was lawful. As a result, whether OCGA § 17-5-30 provides a suppression remedy is not an issue that must be decided here. Because the remaining question on certiorari—whether law enforcement's entry into Petitioner's house violated OCGA § 17-5-27, as distinct from the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution—is fact-specific and thus has little gravity outside the context of this case, the Court has determined that the writ of certiorari issued in Case No. S23G0714 was improvidently granted. Accordingly, the writ is vacated, and the petition for certiorari in Case No. S23C0714 is denied.

All the Justices concur, except Pinson, J., not participating.