We have no hesitation in concluding that a reasonable officer would have stopped defendant [in view of the "lookout" and] after observing him [cross the centerline of] the interstate highway." Guerrero v. State, 198 Ga. App. 397 ( 401 S.E.2d 749). Citing State v. Diaz, 191 Ga. App. 830 ( 383 S.E.2d 195), defendant also urges us to conclude that defendant did not give the trooper permission to search the automobile.
Thus, three kilograms is well over 28 grams. See Allison v. State, 259 Ga. App. 775, 778-779 (2) ( 577 SE2d 845) (2003) (indictment charging defendant with conspiracy to commit trafficking in cocaine by agreeing "to take possession of more than 400 grams of cocaine" sufficiently alleged essential elements of the offense); Guerrero v. State, 198 Ga. App. 397, 398 (2) ( 401 SE2d 749) (1991) (indictment charging that "defendant did `knowingly possess more than 400 grams of cocaine, a controlled substance, in violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act,'" sufficiently alleged essential elements of trafficking in cocaine); OCGA § 16-13-31 (a) (1). See Bradford, supra.
" (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Guerrero v. State, 198 Ga. App. 397 (1) ( 401 S.E.2d 749) (1991). Allenbrand insists his acquittal on the failure to maintain lane charge invalidates the stop.
Held: Although Lowe's motion to suppress relied upon Brown v. State, 188 Ga. App. 184, 187 ( 372 S.E.2d 514), in which this court found the consent search of a car was illegal because Brown was unlawfully detained at the time the consent to search was obtained, the trial court concluded the facts of this case were more analogous to those in Guerrero v. State, 198 Ga. App. 397 ( 401 S.E.2d 749), concluded the traffic stop was valid, and also concluded that Lowe freely and voluntarily consented to the search of the car. In Guerrero, this court affirmed the trial court's denial of a motion to suppress because it found that the traffic stop was not pretextual and thus did not taint a subsequent consent search.
The deputy testified that he pulled Slater's car over for failure to maintain lane and a tag light violation. He further testified that he regularly stops motorists for weaving because of the number of drivers driving under the influence of alcohol on Interstate 75 at that time of the night. A reasonable officer would have stopped Slater under the circumstances presented here. See Guerrero v. State, 198 Ga. App. 397 ( 401 S.E.2d 749) (1991) (where this court affirmed the denial of a motion to suppress evidence after concluding that a reasonable officer would have stopped defendant after observing him weave several times on the interstate). We recognize that on a motion to suppress evidence, the trial court sits as the trier of fact and its finding should not be disturbed by this court if there is any evidence to support them.
Traffic stops which resulted in the arresting officers' uncovering evidence of drug possession or trafficking have been upheld on the ground that the drivers had committed traffic violations within the observation of the law enforcement officers who had stopped them. Guerrero v. State, 198 Ga. App. 397 (1) ( 401 S.E.2d 749) (1991); O'Keefe v. State, 189 Ga. App. 519, 521 (1) ( 376 S.E.2d 406) (1988); Williams v. State, supra; Lombardo v. State, 187 Ga. App. 440, 441 (2) ( 370 S.E.2d 503) (1988); Whisnant v. State, 185 Ga. App. 51, 52 (1) ( 363 S.E.2d 341) (1987); Lopez v. State, 184 Ga. App. 31 (1) ( 360 S.E.2d 722) (1987); Steward v. State, 182 Ga. App. 659, 660 (1) ( 356 S.E.2d 890) (1987); United States v. Harris, supra at 1116 (2); United States v. Hardy, supra at 756 (1); United States v. Bates, supra. In contrast, traffic stops have been held to be unlawful where the defendants committed no traffic violations, and the stops, though based on drug courier profiles, were not justified by specific, articulable facts sufficient to give rise to a reasonable suspicion of criminal conduct.
We hold that the trial court's findings are supported by the record and its denial of defendant's motion to suppress was proper. See Thomas v. State, 201 Ga. App. 292 (1) ( 410 S.E.2d 786) (1991); Guerrero v. State, 198 Ga. App. 397 (1) ( 401 S.E.2d 749) (1991); Williams v. State, 187 Ga. App. 409 (1) ( 370 S.E.2d 497), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 942 ( 109 SC 366, 102 L.Ed.2d 356) (1988); Coop v. State, 186 Ga. App. 578 (1) (a) ( 367 S.E.2d 836) (1988). Judgment affirmed. Carley, P. J., and Johnson, J., concur.