FI RST DI VI SI ON

BA RNES, P. J.

, M ERCI ER and BROWN, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a l s .us /r ule s

Nov em ber 14, 2019



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 9 A2 10 8 . HUDSON v

. THE STATE.

M E R C I E R , J u dg e.

Fo l l owi n g a b en ch t ri a l

, R o b e rt Lee Hu d s o n w as co n v i ct ed o f ag g rav at ed

s ex u al b at t ery

, s t at ut ory rap e, an d ag g rav at ed ch i l d m o l es t at i o n. He ap p eal s, arg u i n g

t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n d en y i n g h i s m o t i o n t o s u p pres s . W e affi rm

.

Vi e w e d f a v o rab l y t o t h e v erd i ct

, th e ev i d en ce s h o ws t h e fo l l o w i n g

. See

Bl a ckwel l v. S t a t e

, 3 3 7 Ga. Ap p. 1 7 3

, 1 7 4 (7 8 6 SE2 d 5 5 2 ) (2 0 1 6 ). On No vem b er 3 0,

2 0 1 5

, t h e m o t her o f 1 3 -y ear-o l d D. M

. rep o rt ed t o p o l i ce t h at s h e h ad d i s co v ered

s ex u al l y ex p l i ci t s o ci al m ed i a m es s ag es ex ch an g ed b et w een D. M

. an d Hu d s o n

. Th e

p o l i ce i n t erv i ewed D

. M

., w h o s t a t e d t hat s h e an d Hu d so n h ad m et o n l i ne,

co rres p o n d ed v i a s o ci al m ed i a, an d en g ag ed i n b o t h s ex u al i n t erco u rs e an d o ral s exo n s ev eral occas i o n s at h e r h o m e

. D

. M

. p ick ed Hu d s on ’ s p ict u re o u t o f a

p h o t o g rap h i c l i n eu p an d i d en t i fi ed h i m as t h e m an wi t h wh o m

s h e h ad s ex

.

Aft er i n t erv i e w i n g D. M

. an d rev i ewi n g th e s ex ual l y ex p li ci t m es s ag es

, t h e

i n v es t i g at i n g o ffi cers wen t to t h e a p art m en t co m pl ex wh ere Hu d s o n po s si b l y l i v ed

an d s aw hi m wal k in g t oward an ap art m en t t h at h ad b een l eas ed b y h i s wi fe. Th ey l o s t

s i gh t o f Hu d s o n an d

, b e l i e vi n g t h at h e h ad en t ered t he ap art m en t

, k n o ck ed o n t h e

fro n t d o o r. No o n e res p o nd ed

. In s t ead

, t h e o ffi cers s p o tt ed Hu d so n ru n ni n g b eh i n d

t h e ap art m en t b u il d i n g

. Th ey ap p reh en d ed h i m aft er a s h o r t ch as e, arres t ed h i m

,

p l aced hi m i n a p at ro l car, an d read h i m h i s ri g h t s p urs u an t t o Mi r a n d a v. Ar i z o n a

,

3 8 4 U. S. 4 3 6 (8 6 SCt 1 6 0 2 , 1 6 LE2 d 6 9 4 ) (1 9 6 6 ).

Aft er recei v i n g hi s M

i r a n d a warn i n g s

, Hu d s o n m ad e s ev eral s t at em en t s to

p o l i ce. He i n i t i al l y d en i ed an y i n ap p ro p ri at e co n du ct an d as s ert ed t h at h e d i d n ot

k n o w D. M . Th e fo ll owi n g co n v ers at i o n t hen o ccu rred :

Offi cer: M ay

b e y o u ju s t d i d n ’ t k n o w [D. M .] was y o u n g. M ay b e sh e t o l d

y o u a l i e, to l d y ou s h e w as a d i fferen t ag e. If t h at ’ s wh at h ap p en ed y o u

ju s t n eed t o t el l m e t h at

, s o I k n o w. Bu t t o t el l m e t h at y o u d o n’ t k n o w

h er a n d yo u was nev er th ere, an d I kn o w th at ’ s a l i e, t h en t h at ’ s n o t

h el p in g

.

2Hu d so n : Ai n ’ t g o n n a h el p m e n ei t h er si r i f I g o t o jai l

. If I t el l y o u I

m es s ed wi th h er l i k e, I’ m ad m i t t i n g t h e g u i l t

.

Offi cer: At l eas t t h en I co u l d t el l t h em y ou co o p erat ed i ns t ead o f l y i n g

t o m e. Th en d en y i n g i t an d t h em p ro v i n g t h a t y o u d en i ed i t an d l i ed

.

Th ey [wi l l ] t h ro w t h e b o o k at y o u

.

Aft er t h at ex ch an g e, Hu d s o n ad m i t t ed t h at h e a n d D. M

. h ad en g ag ed i n s ex u al

i n t erco u rs e an d o ral s ex an d t h at h e h ad p l aced h is f i n g e r s i n si de her v ag i n a. He

i n s i s ted , h o wev er, t h at D. M . h ad t o l d h i m s h e was 2 0 y ears o l d

.

Pri o r t o t ri al

, Hu d s on m o v ed t o s u p p res s h is s tat em en t s to p o l i ce. Th e t ri al

co u rt g ran t ed th e m o ti o n i n p art

, ex cl u d i n g an y cu s t o di al s t at em en t s Hu d so n m ad e

b efo re h e was ad v i s ed o f h i s Mi r a n d a ri g h t s

, bu t d en i ed t h e m o t i o n as t o rel ev an t

s t a t em en t s m ad e aft er h e recei v ed t h e M i r a n d a warn i ng s

. Th e cas e p ro ceed ed t o a

b en ch t ri al on s t i p u l a t e d ev i den ce, an d th e t ri al co u rt fo u n d Hu d s o n g u i l t y o f

ag g rav at ed s ex u al b at t ery

, s t at ut o ry rap e, an d ag g rav at ed ch i l d m o les t at io n

. Hu d so n

fi led a m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al , wh i ch t h e t ri al co u rt d en i ed , an d t h i s ap p eal fo l l o wed

.

1

. As s ert i n g t h at h i s “ co nfes s i o n was t h e pro d u ct o f a t hreat ,” Hu d s o n arg u es

t h at t h e tri al co u rt erred i n refu s i n g t o s up p res s t h e i ncri m i n at i n g s tat em en t s. Befo re

ad m i t t i ng ev i d en ce o f a co n fes s i o n

, a “ t ri al co u rt m u s t co n s i d er t h e t o t al i t y o f t h e

3ci rcu m s t an ces an d as s es s wh et h e r t h e d efen d an t m ad e t h e s t at em en t v o l u n t ari l y .”

Bl a ckwel l

, s u p ra at 1 7 5 (1 ); s ee al s o O CGA § 2 4 -8 -8 2 4 (“ To m ak e a co n fes s i o n

ad m i s s i b l e, i t s h al l hav e been m ad e v o l u n t ari l y

, wi th o ut b ei ng in d uced b y an o t h er by

t h e s l i g h t es t h o p e o f ben efi t o r rem o t es t fear o f i n ju ry

. ”). W e wi ll n o t rev ers e a t ri al

co u rt ’ s d et erm i n at i on as t o v o lu n t ari n es s ab s en t cl ear erro r. See Bl a ckwel l , s u p ra.

Hu d so n arg u ed bel o w t h a t t h e p o l i ce co erced h i s co n fes s i o n b y “ say i n g t h ey

wo u l d t h ro w t he b o o k at [h im ] i f [h e di d n ’ t ] co n fes s [.] ” Th e t ri al co u rt reject ed t h i s

cl ai m

, fi n d i n g t h e o ffi cer’ s s t at em en t t o b e “ ak i n t o a m ere ‘ t ru i s m ’ o r reco u n t i n g o f

fact rat h er t h an a t h reat o f i nju ry t h at wo u l d ren d er t h e s tat em en t i n v ol un t ary .”

W e ag ree. “ Th ere i s a m at eri al d i fferen ce b et wee n a s t a t e m en t t o a [s u s p ect ]

t h at i t wo u l d b e b e t t e r fo r h i m t o t el l t h e t ru t h

, an d o ne wh erei n h e i s t o ld t h at i t

wo u l d b e b e t t er fo r h i m t o m ak e a co n fes s io n .” R og er s v. S ta t e

, 1 4 2 Ga. Ap p

. 3 8 7,

3 8 8 (2 ) (2 3 6 SE2 d 1 3 4 ) (1 9 7 7 ) (ci t at i o n s

, p u n ct uat i o n

, an d em p h as i s o m i t ted ). M ere

“ ex h o rt at i o n s th at [an accu s ed ] s h o u l d t el l t h e t ru t h ” d o n o t ren der a c o n fes s i o n

i n v o l u n t ary b ecau s e “ n o h o p e o f b en efi t s p ri n g s fro m s u ch an ad m on i s h m en t .”

Mo r a l es v. S t at e

, 3 3 7 G a. Ap p

. 6 1 4

, 6 1 7 (2 ) (b ) (7 8 8 SE2 d 5 35 ) (2 0 1 6) (ci t at i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed ).

4Un d ou b t ed l y

, t h e o ffi cer i n t h i s ca s e ad m o n i sh ed Hu d s on n o t t o l i e. Bu t t h e

o ffi cer d i d n ot t el l Hu d s o n t h at h e wo u l d b e b et t er o ff i f h e co n fes s ed

, o ffer Hu d so n

a n y b e n efi t in ex ch an g e fo r th e co n fes s io n, o r th reat en i n ju ry if Hu d s o n refu s ed t o

co o perat e wi t h t h e p o l i ce. An d “ [t ] el l i n g a s us p ect t h at t ru t h fu l co o p erat i on m i g h t b e

co n si d ered b y o t h ers d oes n o t ren d er a s t at em en t in v o l u n tary [.] ” R o g er s v. S t a t e

, 2 8 9

Ga. 6 7 5 , 6 7 9 (3 ) (7 15 SE2 d 6 8 ) (2 0 1 1 ). Mo reo v er, t h e o ffi cer’ s s tat em en t s “ d i d n ot

i n v o l v e p h y s i cal o r m en t al to rt u re, t h e h al l m ark o f i n du cem en t b y a fear o f i n

ju ry .”

S mi th v. S t a t e

, 2 95 Ga. 2 8 3, 2 87 (1 ) (b ) (i ) (7 5 9 SE2 d 52 0 ) (2 0 1 4 ). He m erel y warn ed

Hu d s o n of t h e co n seq u en ces o f l y i n g t o t h e p o li ce.

Th e t o tal i t y

o f t h es e ci rcu m s t an ces au t h ori zed t h e t ri al co u rt t o co ncl u d e t h at

Hu d s o n co n fes s ed v o l un t ari l y

. W e fi n d n o erro r, t herefo re, i n t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s refu s al

t o s u p p res s th e i n cri m i n at i n g s t at em en t s o n v o l un t ari n es s g ro un d s

. See Do z i er v.

S t a t e

, 3 0 6 Ga. 29

, 3 7 (4 ) (c) (8 2 9 SE2 d 13 1 ) (2 01 9 ) (o ffi cer’ s s t at em en t t o d efen d an t

t h at h e w o u l d arres t d efen d an t ’ s wi fe i f s h e l i ed ab o u t d efen d an t ’ s wh ereab o u t s was

a “ m ere t ru i s m ” an d di d n o t ren d er d efen d an t ’ s s u bs eq u en t co n fes s i o n i n v o l u n t ary );

S mi th

, s u p ra (o ffi cer’ s s t at em en t t o d ef e n d a n t t h at d efen d an t ’ s s i s t er “ m i g h t b e

s u b j e c t t o arres t fo r l y i n g t o p o l i ce ab o u t an i t em t ak en i n a ro b b ery i s a ‘ m ere

t ru i s m ’ ”); Bl a ckwel l

, s u p ra a t 1 7 6 (1 ) (“ [A] s t at em en t b y po l i ce t h at m ak es t h e

5d efen d an t aware o f p o t en t i al l eg al co n s eq u en ces i s i n t h e n at u re of a m ere t ru i s m t h at

d o es n o t co n s t it u t e a th reat o f i n ju ry o r p ro m i s e o f b en efi t [.] ”) ( c i t a t i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed ).

2

. Hu d s o n fu rt h er arg u es t hat h i s arres t w as i ll eg al becau s e t h e a r r e s t i n g

o ffi cers d i d n ot h av e an arres t warran t o r p ro b ab l e cau s e t o b el ie v e t h a t h e h ad

co m m i t t ed a cri m e. He th u s cl ai m s th at hi s in cri m i nat i ng s t at em e n t s

, w h ich i n h i s

v i ew were “ d i sco v ered as a re s u l t o f th e u nl awfu l arres t ,” s h ou l d h av e b een

s u p p res s ed . Th i s cl ai m

h as n o m eri t

.

Hu d so n d id n o t ch al l en g e t h e val i d i t y o f h i s arres t b el o w o r rai se t h i s s p eci fi c

arg u m en t i n h is m o t i o n t o s u p p res s o r at t he s u p p res s i o n h eari ng

. Ou r an al y s i s o f t h e

cl ai m

, t h erefo re, i s l i m it ed t o a rev i ew fo r “ p lai n erro r affect i n g s u b st an t i al ri g h t s .”

S t a t e v. H

er r er a-Bu s t ama n t e

, 3 0 4 Ga. 2 59

, 2 6 3 (2 ) (b ) (8 1 8 SE2 d 5 52 ) (2 0 1 8 )

(ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ); s ee al s o OCGA § 2 4 -1 -1 0 3 (d ). To es t ab l i s h p l ai n

erro r, Hu d s o n m

u s t

p o i n t t o an erro r t hat w as n ot affi rm at i v el y wai v ed

, [t hat was ] cl ear an d

n o t o p en t o reas o n ab l e d i s p u t e, [t h at ] affect ed h i s s ub s t an t i al ri g h t s

, an d

[t hat ] s eri o u s l y affect ed t h e fai rn es s

, i n t e g r i t y o r pu b l i c rep u t at i o n o f

ju d i ci al p ro ceed i n g s

.

Id . (ci t at i o n an d p u n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed ).

6Hu d so n can n o t m eet t h es e req ui rem en t s

. As an in i t i al m at t e r

, h e s t i p u l at ed

b el o w t o t h e ad m i s s i b i l i t y o f h i s s t at em en t s t o p o l i ce, as s ert i n g at t h e b eg i n n i n g o f t h e

b e n c h t r i al t h at h e o n l y w i s h ed “ t o p res erv e t h e i s s u e o f t h e co n fes s i o n

, t h e

v o l u n t ari n es s ,” an d o t h erwi s e h ad “ n o o b ject i o n ” t o t h e ev i d en ce. Hu d s o n

, t herefo re,

affi rm at i v el y wai v ed an y arg u m en t t h at t h e co n fes s i o n was in ad m i s si bl e as t h e fru i t

o f an u nl awfu l arres t

. See Ad a ms v. S t at e

, 3 0 6 Ga. 1

, 3 (1 ) (8 2 9 S E 2 d 1 2 6 ) (2 0 1 9 )

(d efen d an t affi rm at i v el y w ai ved al l eg ed erro r rel at i n g t o ad m i s s i o n o f ev i d en ce by

s t at i n g t hat h e d i d n o t o b

ject t o t h e ev i d en ce an d t h at it h ad been p ro p erl y ad m i t t ed ).

Fu r t h e r m o re, t h e o ffi cers arres ted Hu d s o n a f t er 1 3 -y ear-o l d D

. M

. i d en t i fi ed

h i m as t h e m an wh o en g ag ed in s ex u al i n t erco u rs e an d o ral s ex wi t h h er. As n o t ed by

o u r Su p rem e Co u rt

,

[a] warran t les s arres t i s co n s t i tu t i o n al ly v al i d i f at th e t i m e o f t h e arres t

t h e arres t i n g o ffi cer h as p ro b ab l e cau s e t o b el i ev e t h e accu s ed h as

co m m i t t ed o r is co m

m i t t i n g an o ffen s e. Pro b ab l e cau s e e x i s t s i f th e

arres t i n g o ffi cer h as k n o wl ed ge an d reas o n ab l y t ru s two rt h y i n fo rm at i o n

ab o u t fact s an d ci rcu m s t an ces s u ffi ci en t fo r a p ru den t p ers on t o b el iev e

t h e accu s ed h as co m

m i t t ed an o ffen s e.

Deveg a v. S t a t e

, 2 8 6 G a. 4 48

, 4 5 1 (4 ) (b ) (6 8 9 SE2 d 2 9 3 ) (2 0 1 0 ) (ci t at i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed ).

7Gi v en t h e ev i d en ce av ai l ab l e t o t h e offi cers b efo re Hu d s on ’ s arres t

, i n cl u d i n g

t h e i n fo rm at i on p ro v i d ed b y D. M

., h er p h ot o i d en t i fi cat io n o f Hu d s o n, an d pri n t o u t s

o f Hu d s o n ’ s s ex u al l y ex p l i ci t m es s ag es t o h er

, t h e o ffi cers h ad p ro b ab l e cau s e to

b el i ev e t h at Hu d so n had co m m i t t ed a cri m in al o ffen s e. See, e.g

., OCGA § 1 6 -6 -3 (a)

( d e f inin g s t at u t o ry rap e); OCGA § 1 6-6 -4 (c) (d efi n i n g ag g rav at ed ch il d m ole sta tion)

.

Al t h o u g h Hu ds o n no w arg u es t h at t h e o ffi cers d i d n o t kn o w wh o h e was w h en t h ey

arres t ed hi m , t h e ev i den ce s h ows o t h erwi se. Befo re t h e p ol i ce k n o ck ed o n t h e d o o r

t o th e ap art m en t wh ere t hey b el i ev ed Hu d s o n l i v ed

, t h ey s aw h i m wal k i n g t oward t h e

ap art m en t , an d o n e o ffi cer reco g n i zed h i m . Th e au d i o reco rd i n g o f Hu d s o n ’ s arres t

fu rt her rev eal s t h at wh e n t h e o ffi cers ap p reh en d ed h i m

, h e as k ed t hem wh o t h ey

wan ted

. On e o ffi cer res p o n d ed , “ Ro b ert Lee Hu d s o n , y ou .”

Th e o ffi cers k n ew wh o Hu d s o n was an d

, at th e t i m e o f th e arres t

, h ad p ro b ab l e

cau s e t o b e l i ev e th at h e h ad co m m i t ted a cri m i n al o ffen s e i n v o l v in g D. M

.

Acco rd in g ly

, Hu d s o n ’ s in cri m in at i n g s t at em en t s were n o t s u b ject t o su p pres s i o n as

t h e fru i t o f an u n l a w f

u l a r r e s t

. See Deveg a

, s u pra (“ [E] v en i f we as s u m e t h at t h e

warran t l es s arres t i n th i s cas e was i l l eg al

. . . , s u p p res si on o f t h e fru i t s o f t h at arres t

i s n o t req u i red b ecau s e t h e arres t was m ad e wi t h s u ffi ci en t p ro b ab l e cau s e an d i n an

o ffi ce, rat h er t han i n t h e s an ct i ty o f t h e h o m e.”); Pa r ker v. S t a t e

, 3 2 6 Ga. Ap p

. 1 7 5,

81 7 9 (3 ) (7 5 4 SE2 d 4 0 9 ) (2 0 1 4 ) (reas o n ab l e s u s pi ci on t h at d efen d an t h ad co m m i t t ed

a cri m e d ev el o p ed i n to pro bab l e cau s e t o arres t wh en co -d efen d an ts p o s i t i v el y

i d en t i fi ed d efen d an t as a part i ci p an t i n t h e arm ed ro b b ery ); see al s o St a te v. McCl o u d

,

3 4 4 Ga. Ap p

. 5 9 5

, 5 9 8 (8 1 0 SE2 d 6 6 8 ) (2 0 1 8 ) (“ [T] h e s t an dard o f p ro bab l e cau s e i s

an o b ject i v e o ne[.] ”) (p u n ct u at i o n o m i tt ed ).

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Ba r nes , P. J., a n d

Br o wn , J., co ncu r

.

9