¶1I dissent from the holding of the majority of this court that “A search warrant supported only by an affidavit based upon information and belief is wholly void and inadmissible in evidence for any purpose.” A search warrant can properly issue upon affidavit sworn to upon the information and belief of the affiant. Lowrey v. Gridley, 30 Conn. 450; Rose v. State, 171 Ind. 662, 17 Ann. Cas. 228. A warrant charging a crime can issue upon an affidavit in which the affiant swears to the best of his knowledge and belief. Dickson v. State, 62 Ga. 583; Franklin v. State, 85 Ga. 570 (11 S. E. 876); McAlpin v. Purse, 86 Ga. 271 (12 S. E. 412); Brown v. State, 109 Ga. 570 (34 S. E. 1031). We can conceive of no sound reason for holding that greater strictness is required in an affidavit for a search warrant. Nor is the holding that “A search warrant can only be granted after a showing made before a magistrate, under oath, that a .crime has been committed,” a sound one. It is not necessary that the affidavil should allege the commission of a crime. It is sufficient if ii *752alleges reasonable ground for suspecting an offense. 24 R. C. L. 707, § 10. The purpose of a search warrant is to ferret out crime. If the commission of the crime and the criminal are known, no search warrant would ever be necessary. I am authorized to say that Mr. Justice Hill agrees in this dissent.
160 Ga. 744
Smoot v. State
Decided July 18, 1925
Supreme Court of Georgia · decided 1925-07-18
Relies on Rose v. State · Brown v. State · Dickson v. State
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1925-07-18
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently March 2024
18 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →