## Facts

- Harber was indicted on two counts of violating the Georgia Controlled Substances Act.
- University of Georgia campus police officers sought a search warrant for Harber’s residence and then executed that warrant.
- Harber’s residence was located more than 500 yards off campus property.
- The search produced evidence supporting the drug charges.
- Harber filed a pretrial motion to suppress, arguing the campus police lacked authority to obtain and execute a warrant for a private residence beyond the territorial limits described in OCGA § 20-3-72.
- The trial court granted the motion to suppress, relying on *Hill v. State*, 193 Ga. App. 280, 387 S.E.2d 582 (1989), which had concluded that campus police were not authorized to obtain and execute off-campus warrants for private residences.
- The State appealed the suppression order.

## Issues

1. Whether duly certified University of Georgia campus police officers are “officer[s] of this state” under former OCGA § 17-5-20 and therefore may obtain and execute a search warrant for a residence located outside the territorial area referenced in OCGA § 20-3-72.
2. Whether *Hill v. State* should be followed or overruled to the extent it treated OCGA § 20-3-72 as limiting campus police authority to obtain and execute off-campus search warrants.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Georgia reversed the trial court’s order suppressing the evidence.
- The court held that OCGA § 20-3-72 addresses the territorial authority of campus police officers to make arrests, and it does not address or limit their authority to obtain or execute search warrants.
- The court held that former OCGA § 17-5-20 is the statute governing who may apply for a search warrant, and it authorizes issuance upon the application of an “officer of this state or its political subdivisions” charged with enforcing criminal laws.
- Relying on prior interpretation of former OCGA § 17-5-20, the court concluded that an “officer of this state” includes an officer authorized to enforce state criminal laws who has received POST certification under the Georgia Peace Officer Standards and Training Act.
- Because the University of Georgia campus police officers involved were properly certified and charged with enforcing criminal laws, they had authority under former OCGA § 17-5-20 to obtain and execute a search warrant directed to an off-campus residence.
- The court overruled *Hill v. State* to the extent it conflicted with this interpretation.

## Legal Principles

- Former OCGA § 17-5-20 permits issuance of a search warrant only upon application by an “officer of this state or its political subdivisions charged with the duty of enforcing the criminal laws.”
- For former OCGA § 17-5-20, an “officer of this state” includes a peace officer authorized by the State to enforce criminal laws and certified under the Georgia Peace Officer Standards and Training Act.
- A statute limiting an officer’s territorial arrest authority (such as OCGA § 20-3-72) does not, by its terms alone, limit the statutory authority to apply for and execute a search warrant under former OCGA § 17-5-20.
- A certified campus police officer who qualifies as an “officer of this state” may obtain a warrant even if the place to be searched lies outside the geographic area tied to the officer’s employing entity.
- Appellate precedent that conflicts with the governing warrant statute must yield to the statute and may be overruled to the extent of the conflict.

## Conclusion

*State v. Harber* holds that properly certified University of Georgia campus police officers qualify as “officers of this state” under former OCGA § 17-5-20 and may obtain and execute a search warrant for an off-campus residence, even though OCGA § 20-3-72 limits their arrest authority by territory; therefore, the trial court erred by suppressing the evidence based on *Hill v. State*, and the Court of Appeals reversed.


State v. Harber, 401 S.E.2d 57, 198 Ga. App. 170 (1990)