Construing the evidence most favorably to uphold the trial court's findings, as we must, we cannot say that its determination that the informant was reliable was clearly erroneous. See Johnson v. State, 230 Ga. App. 535 (1) ( 496 S.E.2d 785) (1998) (informant found reliable because he had provided information that led to three prior arrests and/or seizures of drugs); Rider v. State, 222 Ga. App. 602 ( 475 S.E.2d 655) (1996) (confidential informant who had given information four previous times leading to two search warrants and five arrests was reliable); Anthony v. State, 197 Ga. App. 297, 298 (1) ( 398 S.E.2d 580) (1990) (informant deemed reliable because his information had resulted in three or four prior arrests). Wilson argues that, regardless of the informant's reliability, the information given must provide some basis for predicting the future behavior of the suspect.

These statements were sufficient to establish the reliability of the informant. See Johnson v. State, 230 Ga. App. 535 ( 496 SE2d 785) (1998) (informant found reliable because he provided prior information that led to arrests and/or seizures of drugs on at least three separate occasions); Rider v. State, 222 Ga. App. 602 ( 475 SE2d 655) (1996) (informant who had given information four previous times leading to two search warrants and five arrests found reliable); Anthony v. State, 197 Ga. App. 297, 298 (1) ( 398 SE2d 580) (1990) (informant deemed reliable because his information had resulted in three to four arrests). We also note that a search warrant was not even necessary in this case because at the time of the search, McTaggart had forfeited his rights under the Fourth Amendment pursuant to his probated sentence from Pickens County. Special Condition 10 of McTaggart's probated sentence states as follows:

Stokes, supra ("Articulable suspicion requires a particularized and objective basis for suspecting that a citizen is involved in criminal activity."). See Steed v. State, 273 Ga. App. 845, 846-847 (1) ( 616 SE2d 185) (2005) (a tip from a known reliable informant gives police reasonable, articulable suspicion to initiate an investigative stop); Wilson v. State, 249 Ga. App. 560, 562 ( 549 SE2d 418) (2001); Rider v. State, 222 Ga.App. 602, 604 ( 475 SE2d 655) (1996). See Solis, supra at 497 (1) (a).

(Citations omitted.) Rider v. State, 222 Ga. App. 602, 604 ( 475 SE2d 655) (1996); accord Wilson v. State, 249 Ga. App. 560, 562 ( 549 SE2d 418) (2001). The trial court did not err in denying Steed's motion to suppress.

"Furthermore, in considering the denial of a motion to suppress, we consider all the evidence of record, including evidence introduced at trial."Rider v. State, 222 Ga. App. 602 ( 475 S.E.2d 655) (1996).Watts v. State, 246 Ga. App. 367, 371 (4) ( 541 S.E.2d 41) (2000).

(Citation and punctuation omitted.) Rider v. State, 222 Ga. App. 602 ( 475 S.E.2d 655) (1996). A trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress will be upheld if it is right for any reason. Benton v. State, 240 Ga. App. 243, 245 (1) ( 522 S.E.2d 726) (1999).

(Citation omitted.) Rider v. State, 222 Ga. App. 602 ( 475 S.E.2d 655) (1996). Though the "admissibility of evidence is a matter which rests largely within the sound discretion of the trial court," we note that "Georgia courts favor the admission of any relevant evidence, no matter how slight its probative value.

(Citation omitted.) Rider v. State, 222 Ga. App. 602 ( 475 S.E.2d 655) (1996).State v. Becker, 240 Ga. App. 267, 268 ( 523 S.E.2d 98) (1999).

Rider v. State.Rider v. State, 222 Ga. App. 602 ( 475 S.E.2d 655) (1996). Where the evidence is uncontroverted and no question regarding the credibility of witnesses is presented, the trial court's application of the law to undisputed facts is subject to de novo review.

We also find the delay between the time when the tip was received by Sergeant Johnson and the time when Johnson's van was located by Hambrick to be insignificant under the circumstances of this case. See generally Rider v. State, 222 Ga. App. 602, 603 ( 475 S.E.2d 655) (1996); Pittman v. State, 208 Ga. App. 211 218 (7) ( 430 S.E.2d 141) (1993). Having established that Hambrick had an articulable suspicion that Johnson was in possession of drugs in his vehicle, we also find that he was authorized to use a canine to perform a free-air search around the vehicle to see whether the dog detected evidence of narcotics.