2 9 6 Ga . 4 75

F INAL COP Y

S 1 4 A1 7 2 2 . DEVAUGHN v

. THE S TATE.

NAHMIAS , Ju stic e

.

Ap p e lla n t Je a

n P ie rre De V a u g h n w a s c o n v ic te d o f m a lic e m u rd e r a n d

o th e r c rim e s in c o n n e c tio n with th e sh o o tin g d e a th o f Willia m E ric Cla rk . On

a p p e a l, h e a rg u e s th a t th e tria l c o u rt e rre d in strik in g two bla c k ju ro rs fo r c a u se

,

a llo w in g a k e y wit n e ss to te stify o n sh o rt n o tic e

, a n d a d m ittin g e v id e n c e

o b ta in e d in v io la tio n o f h is Mira n d a rig h ts. Ap p e lla n t a lso a rg u e s th a t th e S ta te

fa ile d to d isc lo se a n a g re e m e n t with a witn e ss. We a ffirm

. 1

1 The v ictim was killed on December 1 3

, 2005. On May 29, 2009, after the p olice had

reinitiated the investig ation as a “cold case” in 2008, a F ulton County g rand jury indicted Appellant,

Constance Clark, and C h r i s t o p her Tumlin for malice murder, two counts of f elony murder,

ag g r avated assault w ith a deadly weapon, hijacking a motor vehicle, and possessi o n o f a firearm

during the c ommission of a crime; Appellant and Clark were a lso charg ed with conspiracy to commit

murder. Appellant was tried separately from April 4 to 11, 2011, and the jury found him g uilty of

all charg es. The trial court sentenced Appellant to life in prison for malice murder a nd consecutive

terms o f twenty y ears f

or the hijacking conviction and five y e ars f or the firearm conviction. The

felony murder v erdicts were v acated by operation of law, a nd the ag g ravated assault and conspiracy

counts merg ed. Appellant filed a timely motion for new trial, which he amended with the assistance

of new counsel on September 12, 2011. After a hearing , the trial court denied the motion on May

3, 2013. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal, and the case was docketed in this Court for the

September 2014 term and submitted for decision on the briefs.

Clark was convicted in her separate trial o n a ll charg es ex cept hijacking and felony murder

predicated on hijacking ; her appeal to this Court is pending decision in Case No. S14A1685. Tumlin

testified at Appellant’s trial under a g rant of use immunity ; the rec o r d d o e s n o t indicate how the

charg es ag ainst him were resolved. The record does not indicate whether Khorey B ranch, who was with Appellant and Tumlin at the time of the crimes, was ever charg ed.1

. Vie we d in th e lig h t m o st fa v o ra b le to th e v e rd ic ts, th e e v id e n c e a t

tria l sh owe d th e fo llo win g. Ap pe lla n t’s c o u sin , Co n sta n c e Cla rk (Cla rk ), wa s

th e vic tim ’s wife ; th e c o u p le l i v e d in Be sse m e r, Ala b a m a

. Cla rk wa s h a v in g

fin a nc ia l d iffic u ltie s, a

n d th e v ic tim h a d life in su ra n c e p o lic ie s fo r $ 6 0 0 ,0 0 0 th a t

n a m e d h e r a s th e p r i ma r y b e n e fic ia ry

. Cla rk to ld Ap pe lla n t th a t th e v ic tim

a b u se d h e r a n d o ffe re d Ap p e lla n t $ 5 ,0 0 0 to k ill h im

.

Th e v ic tim wo rk e d a sid e jo b a s a ba rte n d e r, a n d o n De c e m b e r 1 3

, 2 0 0 5

,

h e d ro v e fro m

h is h o m e to Atla n tato m e e t with Ap p e lla n t, wh o wa s su p p o se d

to ta k e h im to a d isc o un t liq u o r sto re to p u rc ha se su p p lie s fo r a n e v e n t.

Ap p e lla n t c a lle d h is frie n d Kh ore y Bra n c h to a sk if Bra nc h kn e w wh e re h e

c o u ld b u y a gu n

, a n d B ra n c h c o n ta c te d C h risto p h e r Tu m lin

, wh o a g re e d to se ll

Ap p e l l a nt a h a n d g u n

. Ap p e lla n t a n d Bra n c h dro v e in Ap pe lla n t’s c a r to

Tu m lin ’s h o m e in so uth we st Atla n ta

, wh e re Tu m lin so ld Ap p e lla n t a h a n d g u n

.

Tu m lin th e n ro d e with Ap p e lla n t a n d Bra n c h t o a g a s sta tio n n e a r S ix F la g s,

wh e re th e y m e t u p with th e v ic tim a ro un d 9 :0 0 p .m

.

Un d e r th e im

p re ssio n th a t h e wa s be in g le d to th e liq u o r sto re

, th e v ic tim

fo llo we d Ap p e lla nt a n d h is two a sso c ia te s u n til b o th c a rs sto p p e d in a d riv e wa y

i n a n iso la te d se c tio n of th e u n fin ish e d Wa te rfo rd Ed g e su b d iv isio n n e a r Co l l e g e

2P a rk

. A p p e l la n t a n d th e v ic tim g o t o u t o f th e ir c a rs an d e n g a g e d in wh a t

a p p e a re d to b e a c a su a l c o n v e rsa tio n u n til Ap p e lla n t su dd e n ly pu lle d ou t h is g u n

a n d sh o t th e v ic tim fo u r o r fiv e t i me s

, k illin g h im

. Im m e d ia te ly a fte r th e

sh o o tin g

, Tu m lin ju m

p e d o u t o f Ap p e lla n t’s c ar a n d g o t in to th e v ic tim ’s c a r,

a n d b o th c a rs sp e d o u t o f t h e su b d iv isio n

. Ap p e lla n t d ro p p e d Bra n c h o ff a t

Bra n c h’s h o m e b e fo re re tu rn in g h o m e h im se lf. Ap pe lla n t c a lle d th e v ic tim ’s

c e ll p h o n e

, w h ic h Tu m lin a n swe re d

, to a sk wh e re T um lin p la n ne d to le a v e th e

v ic tim ’s c a r; T u m lin to ld Ap p e lla n t n o t to c a l l h im an d th e n a b a n d o n e d th e

v ic tim ’s c a r a

bo u t a m ile fro m h is h o m e

. Afte r re tu rn in g h o m e

, Tu m lin re c e iv e d

a c a ll o n h is o wn c e ll ph on e fro m Ap p e lla n t

, w h o w ar ne d th a t Tu m lin o r h is

p a re n ts m ig h t g e t h u rt if h e to ld th e p o lic e a b o u t th e sh o o tin g

.

Bra n c h a n d T u m lin te stifie d a t Ap p e lla n t’s tria l. Two re sid e n ts wh o liv e d

in th e c o m

p le te d p a rt o f Wa te rfo rd Ed g e te stifie d to h e a rin g sh o ts fire d

, se e in g

th e v ic tim ’s b o d y in a d riv e wa y

, a n d wa tc h in g two c a rs — o n e o f wh ic h

m a tc h e d th e d e sc rip tio n o f A p p e lla nt’s c a r — d riv e o ut o f th e su b d iv isio n with

th e ir h e a d lig h ts o ff. An o th e r witn e ss, w h o h a d d a te d Cla rk fo r a y e a r sta rtin g

a fe w m o n th s a ft e r t h e v i c t i m ’s d e a th

, to ld th e p o lic e th a t Cla rk h a d p a id h e r

c o u sin $ 5 ,0 0 0 to k ill th e v ic tim

. A p p e l l a n t’s fo rm e r m a n a ge r a t a lu m b e r

3c o m

p a ny te stifie d th a t in 2 0 0 5

, Ap p e lla n t d e liv e re d m a te ria ls to th e Wa te rfo rd

Ed g e su b d iv isio n

. Ap p e lla n t’s c e ll p h o n e re c o rd s in d ic a te d th a t o n th e n ig h t o f

th e sh o o tin g

, h e tra v e le d fro m h is h o m e to wa rd Tu m lin ’s ho u se

, th e n to th e a re a

o f th e c rim e sc e n e

, a n d t h e n b a c k t o h is h om e

. Th e c e ll p ho n e re c o rd s a lso

sh o we d c a lls fro m

Ap p e lla nt to Cla rk sh o rtly b e fo re a n d a fte r th e sh o o tin g

.

Th e e v id e n c e p re se n te d a t tria l a n d su m m a riz e d a b o v e w a s s u f

f i c ie n t to

a u th oriz e a ra tio na l ju ry to fin d Ap p e lla n t g u ilty b e y o n d a re a so na b le do u b t o f

th e c rim e s fo r wh ic h h e wa s c o n v ic te d

. S e e Ja c k so n v

. V irg in ia

, 4 43 U. S

. 3 0 7

,

3 1 9 (9 9 S Ct 2 7 8 1

, 6 1 LE2 d 5 6 0 ) (1 9 7 9 ). S e e a lso Ve g a v

. S ta te

, 2 8 5 Ga

. 3 2

, 3 3

(6 7 3 S E2 d 2 2 3 ) (2 0 0 9 ) (“ ‘It w a s fo r th e ju ry to d e te rm in e th e c re d ib ility o f th e

witn e sse s a n d to re so lv e a n y c o n flic ts o r in c on siste n c ie s in th e e v id e n c e .’”

(c ita tio n o m itte d )).

2

. Ap pe lla n t a

rg u e s first th a t th e ju ry se le c tio n p ro c e ss wa s ta in te d b y

ra c ia l b ia s. He fa ile d , h owe v e r, to ra ise th is issu e a t tria l, a n d h e th e re fo re d id

n o t pre se rv e it fo r re v ie w o n a p p e a l. S e e Hig u e ra -He rn a n d e z v

. S ta te

, 2 8 9 Ga

.

5 5 3

, 5 5 4 (7 1 4 S E2 d 2 3 6 ) (2 0 1 1 ). In a ny e ve n t, th e c la im is m e ritle ss.

P o in tin g to th e tria l c o u rt’s re m o v a l fo r c a u se o f two Afric a n -Am e ric a n

p o t e n t i a l ju ro rs, Ju ro rs 1 3 a n d 4 2

, A p p e lla n t a sse rts th a t th e ju ry se le c tio n

4p ro c e ss wa s u n c o n stitu tio n a l u n d e r Ba tso n v

. Ke n tu c k y

, 4 7 6 U. S

. 7 9 (1 0 6 S Ct

1 7 1 2, 9 0 LE2 d 6 9 ) (1 9 8 6 ). H o w e v e r, “ [t] h e a n a ly sis o f B a tso n a p p lie s o n ly to

th e u se o f p e re m

p t o r y s t r ik e s, a n d we are u n a wa re o f a n y a u th o rity fo r

e x tra p o la tin g th e Ba tso n fra m e wo rk to fo r-c a u s e s t r i k e s.” He a d v. S ta te

, 2 7 6

Ga

. 1 3 1

, 1 3 4 (5 7 5 S E2 d 8 8 3 ) (2 0 0 3 ) (fo o tn o te o m itte d ). S e e a lso Ba tso n

, 4 7 6

U. S

. a t 8 2 (in tro du c in g th e c a se a s in v o lv in g “ th e e v id e n tia ry b urd e n p la c e d o n

a c rim in a l d e fe n d a nt wh o c la im s th a t h e h a s b e e n d e n ie d e q u a l p r o t e c tio n

th ro u g h th e S ta te ’s u se o f p e re m p to ry c h a lle n g e s to e x c lu d e m e m b e rs o f h is ra c e

fro m th e p e tit ju ry ” ). Of c ou rse

, ra c ia l b ia s is a n im pe rm issib le b a sis fo r strik in g

ju ro rs fo r c a

u se

, se e id

. a t 8 4

, b u t Ap p e lla nt h a s n ot sh o wn th a t Ju ro rs 1 3 a n d 4 2

we re stru c k

o n th e b a sis o f th e ir ra c e

.

D u rin g vo ir d ir e, J u r o r 1 3 sa id th a t h is p rio r b a d e xp e rie n c e s with th e

p o lic e a n d p ro se c uto rs m ig h t a ffe c t h is ju d gm e n t in th e c a se a n d th a t h e wa s a

m in iste r a n d wo u ld no t fe e l c o m fo rta b le sittin g in ju d g m e n t o f o th e rs. Ju ro r 4 2

twic e b ro k e d o wn c ry in g in th e c o u rtro o m wh e n q u e stio n e d a bo ut h e r b ro th e r,

wh o h a d re c e n tly d ie d in p riso n

, a n d sa id th a t h e r b ro th e r ha d b e e n re p re se n te d

b y an in c o m

p e te nt a tto rn e y wh e n h e w a s c o n v ic te d fo r m urd e r. Th e tria l c o urt

h a s b ro a d d isc re tio n to d e te rm in e a p o te n tia l ju ro r’s im p a rtia lity a n d to strik e fo r

5c a

u se ju r o r s w h o m a y n o t b e fa ir a n d im p artia l. S e e Ro b le s v

. S ta te

, 2 7 7 Ga

.

4 1 5 4 1 5, 4 1 9 -4 20 (5 8 9 S E2 d 5 6 6 ) (2 0 0 3 ) (fin d in g n o a b u se o f disc re tio n wh e re

tria l c o u rt stru c k fo r c a

use o n e p ro sp e c tiv e ju ro r w h o sa id sh e wo uld n o t sta n d

in ju d g m e n t o f a n o th e r, a se c o n d wh o sta te d h e did n o t b e lie v e th e la w wa s

a p p lie d e v e n ly

, a n d a th ird wh o sa id sh e c o u ld n o t sta n d in ju d g m e n t o f a n o th e r

b e c a u se o f h e r re lig io u s b e lie fs a n d wo u ld n o t lo o k a t c e rta in g ra p h ic e v id e n c e );

P ru itt v

. S ta te

, 2 7 0 Ga

. 7 4 5

, 7 5 1 (5 1 4 S E2 d 6 3 9 ) (1 9 9 9 ) (fin d in g no a b u se o f

d isc re tio n wh e re t r i a l c o u rt e x c u se d fo r c a u se a ju ro r wh o sta te d th a t th e le g a l

sy ste m wa s u n fa ir b e c a

u se h e b e lie v e d h is b r oth e r h a d be e n c o n v ic te d in a n

u n fa ir tria l )

. W e s e e n o a b u se o f d isc re tio n h e re a n d

, m o re im p o rta n tly

, n o

in d ic a tio n th a t th e tria l c o u rt stru c k Ju ro rs 1 3 a n d 4 2 b e c a

use o f th e ir ra c e

.

3

. Ap pe lla n t n e x t e n u m e ra te s a s e rro r th a t h is rig ht to c o n fro n t witn e ss

Kh o re y B ra n c h wa s v io la te d . Ap p e lla n t d id no t m a k e a Co n fro nta tio n Cla

use

o b je c tio n a t tria l, a

n d h e th e re fo re f

a i l e d to p re se rv e su c h a n issu e fo r re v ie w.

S e e Hig u e ra -He rn a

n d e z

, 2 8 9 Ga

. a t 5 5 4. Mo re o v e r, a ny su c h ob je c tio n wo u ld

h a v e b e e n friv o lo us, b e c a use B r a n c h te stifie d a t tria l a n d Ap p e lla n t h a d th e

o p p ortu n ity to c ro ss-e x a m in e h im

, so Ap p e lla nt’s rig h t to c o n fro n t Bra n c h wa s

fu lly sa tisfie d

. S e e C ra wfo rd v

. Wa sh in gto n

, 5 4 1 U. S

. 3 6, 5 9 & n

. 9 (1 2 4 S Ct

61 3 5 4, 1 5 8 LE2 d 1 7 7) (2 0 0 4 ).

Lo o kin g to th e a rg u m e n t m a d e i n su p p o rt o f th is e n u m e ra tio n, Ap p e lla n t’s

re a l c o m p la in t is th a t th e S ta te v io la te d a c rim in a l d isc o v e r y s t a t u te b y n o t

in fo rm in g th e de fe n se th a t Bra n c h wo uld te st i f y u n til th e first d a y o f tria l.

OCGA § 1 7 -1 6 -8 (a ) re q u ire s th e pro se c u to r to d isc lo se to d e fe n se c ou n se l th e

n a m e s o f a n d o th e r in fo rm a tio n a b o u t th e S ta te ’s witn e sse s

n o t la te r th a n te n d a y s b e fo re tria l

. . . o r a s o th e rwise ord e re d b y th e

c o u rt,

. . . u n le ss fo r go o d c a u se th e ju dg e a l l o w s a n e x c e p tio n to

th is re q u ire m e n t, in wh ic h e v e n t [d e fe n se ] c o u n se l sh a ll b e a ffo rd e d

a n o p p o rtu n ity to in te rv ie w su c h witn e sse s p rio r to t h e w itn e sse s

b e in g c a lle d to te stify

.

He re

, th e p ro se c u to r e x p la in e d to th e tria l c o u r t th a t T u m lin h a d to ld

in v e stig a to rs th a t a p e rso n k n o wn a s “ Kh o re y ” h a d wa tc h e d Ap pe lla n t sh o o t th e

v ic tim

, b u t c la im e d n o t to kn o w Kh o re y ’s la st n a m e

. 2 Tu m lin id e n tifie d a n o th e r

p e rso n wh o wo u ld k n o w h o w to c on ta c t Kh o re y

, b u t d e sp ite a n e x h a u stiv e

se a rc h

, th e S ta te wa s n o t a b le to lo c a te th a t p e rso n u n til th e F rid a y n ig ht b e fo re

t r ia l, a n d th a t p e rso n re fu se d to sp e a k with a n in v e stig a to r un til th e fo l l o w i n g

Mo n d a y m o rn in g

. On th a t m o rn in g — th e m o rn in g th e tria l b eg a n

— t h e

2 Tumlin’s statement reg arding Khorey was provided to the defense in timely discovery

.

7c o n ta c t p e rso n p ro v id e d th e S ta te with a l a st n a m e an d p h o n e n u m b e r fo r

Kh o re y

. Th e in v e stig a to r wa s a b le to i d e n t i fy a nd sp e a k with Kh o re y Bra n c h

fo r th e first tim e a s th e ju ry wa s b e in g se le c te d

.

Un d e r th e se c irc um sta nc e s, th e tria l c o u rt d id n o t a b u s e i t s d isc re tio n in

ru lin g th a t th e S ta te h a d e sta b lish e d go o d c a use fo r a llo win g a n e x c e p tio n to th e

te n -d a y ru le

. S e e P u g a -Ce ra n te s v

. S ta te

, 2 8 1 Ga

. 7 8, 8 0 (6 3 5 S E2 d 1 1 8 ) (2 0 0 6 )

(fin din g th a t g o o d c a

u se wa s sh o wn wh e re a witn e ss fle d p rio r to tria l a n d wa s

n o t lo c a te d a g a in u n til th e first d ay o f tria l). Th e c o u rt c o m p lie d with OCGA §

1 7 -1 6 -8 (a ) b y g ra ntin g th e d e fe n se a c o n tin u a n c e u n til n o o n th e fo llo win g d a y

to in te rv ie w Bra n c h a n d re v ie w h is st a t em e n t to th e in v e stig a to rs; Ap p e lla n t

wa s a lso e x c u se d fro m th e re q u ire m e nt o f o b ta in in g c e rtifie d c o p ie s o f Bra n c h ’s

p rio r c o n v ic tio n s fo r im

pe a c h m e nt. Ap p e lla n t sa y s th a t h e wa s p re ju d ic e d b y

th e b re v ity o f th e c o n tin u a nc e g ra n te d, b u t “ ‘[m ] e re sh o rtn e ss o f tim e

. . . d oe s

n o t ip so fa c to sh ow a d e n ia l o f th e rig h ts o f a n a c c u se d .’” Liv in g sto n v

. S ta te

,

2 6 6 G a

. 5 0 1

, 5 0 3 (4 6 7 S E 2 d 8 8 6 ) (1 9 9 6 )

. S e e a lso W ilk in s v

. S ta te

, 2 9 1 Ga

.

4 8 3

, 4 8 7 (7 31 S E2 d 3 46 ) (2 0 1 2 ) (fin d in g n o a b u se of d isc re tio n in a llo win g a

witn e ss to te stify d e sp ite h is n o t b e in g on th e S ta te ’s w itn e ss list wh e re th e c o urt

“ su sp e n d e d tria l o v e rn ig h t to a ffo rd a p p e lla n t th e o p p o rtu n ity to in te rv ie w th e

8witn e ss

. . . [a n d re vie w] n o te s re la te d to th e c o n te n t o f h is in te rv ie w b y po lic e ” ).

Ap p e lla n t sp e c ula te s th a t w ith a w e e k-lo n g c o n tin ua n c e h e m ig h t h a ve be e n a b le

to sh o w th a t Bra n c h ’s te stim o n y wa s c o n c o c te d b y in v e stig a to rs, b u t Ap p e lla n t

o ffe re d n o e vid e n c e a t th e m o tio n fo r ne w tria l h e arin g — h e ld m ore th a n two

y e a rs a fte r tria l

— to su p p o rt th a t sp e c u la tio n . Mo re o v e r, Ap p e lla n t wa s a b le

to e ffe c tiv e ly c ro ss-e x a m in e Bra n c h a n d im p e a c h h im u sin g h is p rio r sta te m e n t

to th e in v e stig a to rs. S e e No rris v

. S ta te

, 2 89 Ga

. 1 5 4

, 15 6 -1 5 7 (7 0 9 S E2 d 7 9 2 )

(2 0 1 1 ) (fin d in g n o a

b u se o f d isc re tio n wh e re th e tria l c o u rt g a ve th e d e fe n d a n t

a n o p p o rtu n ity to in te rv ie w th e witn e sse s a n d th e d e fe n d a nt im p e a c h e d th e m o st

im p o rta n t witn e ss with a

p rio r in c o n siste n t sta te m e nt).

4

. Ap pe lla n t c la im s th a t his c e ll p h o n e n u m b e r an d th e c e ll p h o n e

re c o rd s o b t a i n e d u sin g th a t n u m b e r sh o u ld h a v e b e e n su p pre sse d b e c a u se h e wa s

n o t g iv e n Mira n d a wa rn i n g s b e f o re he to ld in ve stig a to rs h is n u m b e r. S e e

Mira n d a v

. Ariz o n a

, 3 8 4 U. S

. 4 3 6 (8 6 S Ct 1 6 0 2

, 1 6 LE2 d 6 94 ) (1 9 6 6 ). S e e

a lso Wo n g S u n v

. U n ite d S ta te s, 3 7 1 U. S

. 4 71

, 4 84 (8 3 SCt 4 0 7

, 9 LE2 d 4 4 1 )

(1 9 6 3 ) (h o ld in g th a t e v id e n c e a c q u ire d a s th e “fru it” o f u n la wfu l p o lic e a c tio n

sh o u ld b e su p p re sse d ). We d isa g re e

.

“ Mira n d a wa rn in g s a re re q u ire d w h e n a p e rso n ‘is (1 ) fo rm a lly a rre ste d

9o r (2 ) re stra in e d to th e d e g re e a sso c ia te d w i t h a f o rm a l a rre st.’ Un le ss a

re a so na b le p e rso n in th e su sp e c t’s situ a tio n wo uld pe rc e iv e th a t h e wa s in

c u sto d y

, Mira nd a wa rn in g s a re n o t n e c e ssa ry .” F re e m a n v

. S ta te

, 2 9 5 Ga

. 8 2 0

,

8 2 2 -8 2 3 (7 6 4 S E2 d 3 9 0 ) (2 0 1 4 ) (c ita tio n s a n d p un c tu a tio n o m itte d ). Th e re c o rd

in th is c a se su p p o rts th e tria l c o u rt’s fin d in g s th a t Ap pe lla n t d ro v e h im se lf to th e

p o lic e sta tio n a fte r b e in g a sk e d to sp e a k to th e in v e stig a to rs; wh il e t h e p o l ic e

te m p o ra rily to o k h is c a r k e y s so th a t th e y c ou ld in sp e c t th e c a r in h is p re se n c e

,

h e wa s n o t re stra in e d in a n y w a y , wa s n e v e r to ld h e wa s u n d e r a rre st, a n d wa s

a llo w e d to sp e a k to h is m o th e r o n th e p h o ne d u rin g th e in te rv ie w; a n d, wh e n h e

a sk e d to le a v e

, h e wa s a llo we d to d o so

. S e e id

. a t 8 2 3 (“ On a p pe a l, th e issu e

is wh e th e r th e tria l c o u rt wa s c le a rly e rro n e o us in its fa c tu a l fin d in g s re g a rd in g

th e a d m issib ility of th e sta te m e n ts.” (c ita tio n s a n d p un c tu a tio n o mi t t e d )).

Ac c o rd in g ly

, th e tria l c o u rt c o rre c tly d e te rm i n e d t h a t Ap p e lla n t wa s n o t in

c u sto d y d u rin g th e in te rv ie w a n d th u s no t e ntitl e d to Mira n d a wa rn in g s. S e e

Te a sle y v

. Sta te

, 2 93 Ga

. 7 5 8

, 7 6 2 (7 4 9 S E2 d 7 1 0 ) (2 01 3 ) (h o ld in g th a t a

d e fe n d a n t wa s n o t in c u sto d y w h e n h e w e n t to th e p o lic e sta tio n o n h is o wn

a c c o rd a n d wa s n o t re stra in e d in a n y wa y ); Hig h to we r v

. S ta te

, 2 7 2 G a

. 4 2

, 4 3

(5 2 6 SE2 d 8 3 6 ) ( 2 0 0 0 ) (fin d in g th a t a d e fe nd an t wa s n ot in c u sto dy wh e re h e

1 0v o lu n ta rily su b m itte d to a n in te rv ie w a t a p o lic e sta tio n

, c o o p e ra te d f u lly in

a n swe rin g q u e stio n s, wa s n o t re stra in e d

, a n d p re se nte d n o e v id e n c e th a t o ffic e rs

h a d p la c e d a n y lim its o n h is fre e d o m to le a v e o r to te rm in a te q u e stio n in g ). 3

Ap p e lla n t a lso c o n te n d s th a t his c e ll p h o n e n u m be r a nd re la te d c e ll p h o n e

re c o rd s sh o u ld ha v e b e e n su p p re sse d be c a use th e p o lic e c o n tin u e d to q u e stio n

h im a fte r h e re q u e ste d a

n a tto rn e y

. S e e Jo rd a n v

. S ta te

, 2 6 7 Ga

. 4 4 2, 44 4 (4 8 0

S E2 d 1 8 ) (1 9 9 7 ) (“ La w e n fo rc e m e n t o ffic e rs m u st im m e d ia te ly c e a se

q u e stio n in g a su sp e c t w h o h a s c le a rly a sse rte d a rig h t to ha v e c o un se l p re se n t

d u rin g c u sto d ia l in te rro g a tio n .” (e m ph a sis i n o r i g in a l)). Th e tria l c o urt

su p p re sse d a ll o f A p p e lla n t’s sta te m e n ts m a d e a fte r th e po in t a t wh ic h h e

a rg u a b ly re q u e ste d c o u n se l. T h e re c o rd sh ows, h owe v e r, th a t A p p e lla n t

d isc lo se d h is c e ll p h o n e n u m b e r lo n g b e fo re m e ntio n in g a la wy e r, so th e p h o n e

re la te d e v id e n c e wa s a lso n o t su p p re ssib le o n th is g ro u n d

.

3 Appellant claims, but the State denies, that the police considered him a suspect from the

moment he walked into the police station. Reg ardless, courts determine w hether a person is in

custody b ased upon the totality of the circumstances; Miranda warning s are n o t re q uired simply

because questioning takes place in a police station or because the p e r son being questioned is

considered a suspect b y the police. See California v. B eheler, 4 63 U

. S. 1121, 1125 (103 SCt 3517,

77 L E2d 1275) (1983). I n fact, when it is undisclosed t o t h e interviewee, “a police officer’s

subjective view that the individual under q uestioning is a suspect

. . . does not bear upon the question

whether the individual is in c u stody for purposes of Miranda.” Stansbury v. California, 511 U. S.

318, 324 (114 SCt 1526, 128 L E2d 293) (1994).

1 15

. F in a lly

, Ap p e lla nt a r g u e s th a t h is c o n v ic tio n s sh o u ld b e re v e rse d

b e c a u se th e S ta te m a d e a n u n d isc lo se d im m u n ity o r le nie n c y d e a l with Bra n c h

in e x c ha n g e fo r h is te stim o n y a g a in st Ap pe lla n t, in v io la tio n o f Gig lio v

. Un ite d

S ta te s, 4 0 5 U. S. 1 5 0 (9 2 S Ct 7 6 3

, 3 1 LE2 d 1 0 4 ) (1 9 7 2 ). Ap p e lla nt a sse rts th a t

th e re m u st h a v e b e e n su c h a d e a l in p la c e a t tria l b e c a use n o c h a rg e s h a v e b e e n

file d a ga in st Bra n c h in c o n n e c tio n with th e vic tim ’s m urd e r e v e n th ou g h Bra n c h

su p p o se d ly im

p lic a te d h im se lf th ro ug h h is te stim on y

. Ho we v e r, “ ‘[t] h e

su b se q u e n t d isp o sitio n o f c ha rg e s a g a in st th e (witn e ss), sta nd in g a lo n e

, d o e s n o t

e sta b lish th e e x iste n c e of a de a l.’” Wim e s v

. S ta te

, 2 9 3 Ga

. 3 6 1

, 3 6 3 (7 44 S E2 d

7 8 7 ) (2 0 1 3 ) (c ita tio n o m itte d ). Th e S ta te d e n i e d th e e x iste n c e o f a d e a l a t th e

m o tio n fo r n e w tria l he a rin g

, th e tria l c o u rt c re d ite d th a t re p re se n ta tio n

, a n d in

th e a b se n c e o f a

n y th in g b ut sp e c u la tio n to th e c o n tra ry

, we c a n no t sa y th a t th e

c o u rt’s fin d in g th a t th e re wa s n o d e a l with Bra n c h is c le arly e rro n e o us. S e e id

.

Ju d g m e n t a ffirm e d . All th e Ju stic e s c o nc u r.

1 2De c id e d F e bru a ry 2 , 2 0 1 5

.

Mu rd e r. F u lto n S u p e rio r Co u rt. Be fo re Ju d g e Mc Bu rn e y

.

Ja n ic e L. Ma

th is, Ad ria n L. P a tric k , fo r a p p e lla nt.

P a u l L

. Ho wa rd

, Jr., Distric t A t t o r n e y

, P a ig e Re e se Wh ita k e r, Le n n y I.

Kric k, Assista n t D istric t Atto rn e y s, S a m u e l S

. O le n s, Atto rn e y Ge ne ra l, P a tric ia

B. Atta wa y Bu rto n

, De p u ty Atto rn e y Ge ne ra l, Pa u la K. S m ith

, S e n io r Assista n t

Atto rn e y Ge n e ra l, Ry a n A. Ko lb , Assista nt Atto rn e y Ge ne ra l, fo r a

p p e lle e

.

1 3