Police received an anonymous report that Catherine Able and others were smoking marijuana in a Cartersville apartment. Four officers went to the apartment for a knock-and-talk because they lacked enough information to seek a warrant. After an encounter at the door, the officers entered, saw marijuana on a coffee table, and collected identifying information from people inside. The trial court granted the defendants’ motion to suppress but made no findings about whether the officers entered with consent. Instead, its order and hearing discussion focused on a general dislike of knock-and-talk procedures. The Georgia Court of Appeals held that approaching a home and knocking does not itself violate the Fourth Amendment, but the legality of the entry and search depended on consent and the surrounding facts. Because the trial court had not decided whether Able consented to the entry, it had not applied the correct legal framework. The appellate court therefore vacated the suppression order and remanded for a determination of consent after the initial encounter. The court did not decide whether the evidence ultimately had to be suppressed.