FI FTH DI VI SI ON

PHI PPS, P. J.

, DI LLA RD and PETERSON, 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

M ay 4, 2016



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 6 A0 14 9 . YARBER v . THE STATE.

P H I P P S , Pres i d i n g J u dg e.

So Yo u n g Yarb er w as t u rn i n g ri g h t fro m o ne st reet o n t o a cro s s st reet wh en h er

v eh icl e co l l i d ed wi t h an o t her. Po l i ce so o n ar r i v ed at t he s cen e an d co n d u ct ed an

i n v es t i g at i o n

. Th e s tat e t h ereaft er accu s ed Yarb e r o f DU I (l es s s afe), 1 fai l u re to

m ai n t ai n l an e, 2 an d i m

p ro p er t u rn at an i n t ers ect i o n

. 3 A ju ry fo u n d Yarb er g u i l t y as

1 OCGA § 4 0 -6 -3 9 1 (a) (1 ) (“ A p ers on s h al l n o t dri v e o r b e i n act ual p h y s i cal

co n tro l o f an y m ov i n g v eh i cl e wh i l e:

. . . Un d er t h e i n fl u en ce o f al co ho l to t h e ex t en t

t h at i t i s l es s s afe fo r t he p ers o n t o d ri v e.”).

2 OCGA § 4 0

- 6

- 4 8 ( 1 ) (“ A v eh i cl e sh al l be dri v en as n earl y as p ract i cab l e

en t i rel y wi t h i n a s i n g l e lan e an d s h al l n o t b e m o v ed fro m s u ch l an e u n ti l t h e d ri v er

h as fi rs t as cert ai n ed t h at s uch m o v em en t can b e m ad e wi t h s afet y .”).

3 O CGA § 4 0 -6 -1 2 0 (1 ) (“ Bo t h t he ap p ro ach fo r a ri g h t t u rn an d a r i g h t t u rn

s h al l b e m ad e as cl o s e as p ract i cab l e t o t he ri g ht -h an d cu rb o r ed g e o f t he ro ad way .”).ch arg ed

. Ch al l en g i n g her j u d gm en t o f co n v i ct i o n

, Yarb er co nt en d s t h at t h e t ri al co u rt

erred b y al lo wi n g t h e ju ry t o h ear a reco rd in g o f t h e ro ad si de cal l m ad e t o 9 1 1 b y t h e

o t h er d ri v er (wh o d i d n ot t es t i fy at t ri al ). Fo r reas o n s t h at fo l l o w, we affi rm

.

On Sep tem

ber 3 0, 2 0 14 at ab o u t 5 : 30 a.m

., two p o l ice o ffi cers i n th ei r s ep arat e

p at ro l cars h ap p en ed u p o n th e s cen e o f t h e ap p aren t ly recen t t wo -v eh icl e co l l i s i o n.

As t h e o ffi cers ’ t ri al t es t i m o n y rev eal ed

, in l i g h t of ev en t s t h at q u ick l y u n fo l ded aft er

t h ei r en co u n ter wi th Yarb er, o n e o ffi cer pu rs u ed a DUI i n v es t i g at i o n

, wh i l e t h e o t h er

o ffi cer fo cu sed o n as cert ai n i n g t h e d ri v i n g m an eu v er s t h at h ad p reci p i t at ed t h e

co l l i s i o n

.

Th e lat t er o f th es e o ffi cers g av e t h e fo ll o wi n g acco u nt

. W h en th ey s t o p p ed at

t h e s cen e, Yarb er (as s h e was s o o n i d en ti fi ed ) w as i n th e d ri ver’ s s eat o f h er v eh i cl e.

Th e en g i n e w a s s t i l l ru n n in g

, an d t h ere was o n e p as s en g er wi t h Yarb er. Th e d ri v er

o f t he o t h er v eh i cl e, as t hat o ffi cer t es t i fi ed

, “ was s t an d i n g o u ts id e o f h i s veh i cl e an d

was st i l l o n t h e p ho n e wi t h 9 1 1

, s o i t h ad ju s t h ap p en ed .” Th e offi ce r a p p ro ach ed

Yarb er, wh o al read y h ad h er wi n d o w d o wn

. He as k ed fo r h er d ri v er’ s l icen s e. Yarb er

was “ s l o w t o res p on d ,” b u t h an d e d t h e o ffi cer h er l i cen se. Th e offi cer s aw t h at

Yarb er’ s ey es were wat ery

, an d h e d et ect ed an o d o r of al co h ol i c b ev erag e em an at i n g

fro m h er b reat h

. Yarb er to l d t h e o ffi cer t hat s h e h ad co n s u m ed a co u p l e o f al co h o l i c

2b ev erag es d u ri n g t h e p reced i ng t wo t o t h ree ho u rs

. D i s cern i ng t hat Y ar b e r was

“ d i sp l ay i n g m an i fes t at i o n s o f p o s s i b l e i m p ai rm en t ,” t h e o ffi cer so n o ti fi ed t h e o t h er

o ffi cer wh o s e ex pert i s e i n cl u d ed DUI i n v es t i g at i o n ( “ t h e D UI o ffi cer”), b efo re

fo cu s i n g o n “ wo rk i n g t h e acci d en t s cen e.”

At t ri al

, t h e p ro s ecu t in g at t orn ey el i ci t ed fro m th e o f f i c e r h i s b ack g ro u n d in

i n v es t i g at i n g car acci d en t s

, t h en as k ed t h e o ffi cer, “ [W ] h at to o k p l ace i n t h e

acci den t ? ” Th e o ffi cer s u m m ari zed

, “ Bas ed on t he s tat em en t from t he ot h er d ri v er an d

t h e p h y s i cal ev i d en ce, [Yarb er] was o n [o n e s treet ] at t em p t i n g t o m ak e a ri g h t t u rn

.

Sh e t u rn ed wi de an d i n t o t h e p at h o f t h e s eco n d v eh icl e t h at was [o n a cro s s -s t reet ]

i n t h e l eft -t u rn l an e wai t i n g t o tu rn l eft .” 4 Th e pro s ecu ti n g at t o rn ey as k ed t h e o ffi cer

t o s tan d an d “ d raw th at o u t

. . . an d i ll u s t rat e [t h at ] t o t h e ju r y

. ” A s t h e o f fi cer

t h ereu p o n d rew an i l l us t rat io n, h e recap p ed

, “ [Yarb er’ s veh i cl e] was

. . . t u rn i n g ri g ht

4 W h i le Yarb er has rai s ed n o o b ject i o n t o th i s o ffi cer’ s t es t i m o n y

, we n o t e t h at

p u rs u an t t o Geo rg i a’ s n ew Ev i d en ce Co d e, “ i f a p art y do es n o t p ro p erl y o b ject to

h ears ay

, t h e o b

ject i o n s h al l be d eem ed wai v ed

, an d t h e h ears ay ev i d en ce s h al l b e

l eg al ev i den ce an d ad m i s s i bl e.” OCGA § 24 -8 -8 0 2 ; s ee Br a d s h a w v. S t at e

, 2 9 6 Ga.

6 5 0

, 6 5 3 (2 ), n

. 2 (7 6 9 SE2 d 8 92 ) (2 0 1 5 ). Acco rd Ha tl ey v. S t a t e

, 29 0 Ga. 48 0

, 4 8 3

(I) (7 2 2 SE2 d 67 ) (2 0 1 2 ) (“ Th e Mel en d ez -Di a z [C] o u rt o bs erv ed t hat “ [t ] h e ri g h t o f

c o nfro n t at i o n m ay

, o f co u rs e, b e wai ved

, i n cl u di n g b y fai l u re t o ob ject t o t h e

o ffen d i n g ev i d en ce; an d St at es m ay ad o p t pro ced u ral ru l es g o v ern i n g t h e ex erci s e o f

s u ch o bject i o n s.”), q uo t i n g M el en d ez -Di a z v. Ma s s a ch u set t

s

, 5 5 7 U.S. 30 5

, 3 1 3 (III)

(A), n . 3 (1 2 9 SCt 2 5 2 7 , 1 7 4 LE2 d 3 1 4 ) (2 0 0 9 ) (ci t at i o n o m i tt ed ).

3an d s w u n g wi de an d s t ru ck [t h e o t h er v eh i cl e] as h e was s it t i n g i n t h e l eft -t u rn l an e

wai t i n g to t u rn .” Ad d i t i o nal l y

, t h e o ffi cer d es cri bed t h at

, wh en h e an d t he DUI o ffi cer

arri v ed at t h e scen e, “ [Yarb er’ s ] v e h i c l e wa s d irect l y i n fro n t o f th e seco n d v eh i cl e

i n v o l v ed

. ”

W h en t h e DUI o ffi cer t o ok t h e s t an d, h e fi rs t reco u n t ed h is s p eci al i zed t rai n i n g

an d ex peri en ce i n D U I in ves ti g at i o n an d d et ect i o n

, t h en p ro v id ed t h e fo l l o wi n g

acco u n t o f wh a t h a d o c c u r red at t h e s cen e. Up o n ap p ro ach i n g Yarb er si tt i ng i n h er

v eh icl e, th e o ffi cer det ect ed a s t ro n g od o r o f al co h o l i c b ev erag e. He i m m ed i at el y

as k ed Yarb er wh et h er s h e h ad b een i n ju red o r n eed ed em erg en cy m ed i cal s erv i ces ;

Yarb er an s wered th at s h e w a s n o t h urt an d d i d n ot need an y su ch h el p

. In res p o n s e

t o t h e o ffi cer’ s i n q u iry

, Yarb er to l d t h e o ffi cer t h at s h e was co m in g fro m a cl u b

. Nex t

,

t h e o ffi cer recal l ed

, “ I as k ed h er wh at h ap p en ed i n th e acci d en t

. Sh e t o l d m e t h at s h e

was m ak i n g a ri gh t t urn fro m [o n e s t reet ] o nt o [a cro ss -s t reet ] .”

To as cert ai n wh et h er t h e o d o r o f al co h o l was em i t ti n g fro m Yarb er’s p e r so n

(as o p po s ed t o h er p a s s e n g er’ s ), th e DUI o ffi cer as ked Yarb er t o s t ep o u t s i d e t h e

v eh icl e. As Yarb er co m

p l i ed

, s h e s t u m

b l ed

, an d “ [t h e o ffi cer] h ad to g rab her arm to

k eep her fro m fal l i n g d o wn .” W h i l e t al k i n g wi th Yarb er o u t s i d e h er v e h i c l e

, t h e

o ffi cer d et ect ed a “ s t ro n g er o d o r o f al co h o l i c b ev erag e co m i n g fro m h er p ers o n .” He

4al s o o b serv ed t h at Yarb er’ s ey es were b lo o d s h o t an d wat ery

, an d t h at “ h er sp eech was

s l urred

, m

u m b l ed

, an d s o m e t i m es i n co h eren t.” Y arb er t o l d t h e o ffi cer t h at s h e h ad

co n su m ed t wo s h o t s o f a ha r d l i q u o r, al t h o u gh s h e d i d n o t s p eci fy a t i m e fram e fo r

t h at co n s u m

pt i o n

. Th e o ffi cer co n d u ct ed o n Yarb er an Al co Sen s o r t es t

, wh i ch res u l t s

were p o s it i v e fo r al co h o l

.

Th e DUI o ffi cer at tem

pt ed to co n d u ct fi el d so b ri et y ev al u at i on s

. Aft er g i v i n g

Yarb er i n s t ru c t io ns o n t ak i n g a h o ri zo n tal gaze ny s t ag m u s (HGN) tes t

, t h e o ffi cer

as k ed Yarb er wh et h er s h e u nd ers t o od th em

. Bu t Yarb er “ b as i cal l y d i d n ’ t an s wer.” As

t h e offi cer reco u n t ed at t ri al

, “ I k ep t g o i n g o v er m y i n s t ru ct i o n s s ev eral t i m es

. Sh e

d i d n ’ t an swer at wh i ch p o in t

. . . I co u l d n ot d et erm i n e wh et h er o r no t t h e H GN tes t

wo u l d b e a v i ab l e op t i o n fo r h er b ecau s e s he wo ul d n ’ t fo l l o w t h e i n s t ru ct i o n s .” So t h e

o ffi cer t u rn ed t o a d i fferen t ev al u at i on

.

Th e DUI o ffi cer b eg i n i n s t ru ct i n g Yarb er o n t h e sp eci fi cs of t h e wal k an d t u rn

t es t

– i n cl u d i n g d i rect i ng h er no t t o s t art un t i l sp eci fi cal l y t o l d t o d o s o

. Bu t wh i l e t h e

o ffi cer w as ph y si cal l y d em o n s t rat i n g h o w t o p e r fo rm t h e t es t

, Yarb er’ s b o dy

“ s way ed .” Th en s h e b eg an w al ki n g

. Th e o ffi cer d es cri b ed

, “ [W ] h il e s h e was wal k i n g

s h e s tu m b l ed

, al m o st fel l to t h e g ro u nd at wh i ch p o i n t I h ad t o g rab h er arm ag ai n to

k eep h er fro m fal l i n g s o s h e wo u l d n ’ t fal l i nt o t raf f i c o n t h e ro ad way .” Th e o ffi cer

5ab an do n ed fu rt h er ro ad s i d e s o b ri et y t es t i n g

, h av i n g fo rm ed t h e o pi n i o n t h at Yarb er

was u n der t h e in fl u en ce o f al co h o l t o t h e ex t en t t h at sh e was a les s s afe d ri v er. He

p l aced Yarb er u n d er arres t.

Th e DUI o ffi cer read Yarb er t h e G eo rg i a Im p l i ed Co ns en t w arn i n g s

, an d g av e

h er t h e o p p o rt u n i t y t o su b m i t t o a ch em i cal t es t o f h er breat h

. W h e n t h e o ffi cer

t h ereaft er at t em

p t ed to ad m i n i st er s u ch a t es t t o Yarb er u s i n g t h e In t o x i l i zer 5 0 0 0,

Yarb er di d n o t b l o w i n t o t h e (d es i g n at ed ) t u b e as d irect ed ; in s t ead

, “ s h e b eg an

s u ck in g ai r i n t o h e r b o d y .” Th e o ffi cer s to p ped Yarb er’ s b eh av i o r. Des p i t e t h e

o ffi cer’ s su b seq u en t

, rep eat ed i n s t ru ct i o n s an d d em on s trat i o ns on h o w Yarb er s h o u ld

b l o w i nt o t h e (d es i g n at ed ) t u b e, Y arb er co n t i n u e d t o s u ck ai r i n t o h er b o d y

.

Co n s eq u en t l y

, t h e res u l t s o f t h e In t o x i l i zer 5 00 0 t es ti n g read “ i n s u ffi ci en t s am p l e,”

wh i ch t he o ffi cer ex p l ai n ed

, “ m ean [t ] t hat s h e d i d n o t b lo w, p ro v i d e a b reat h s am p l e.”

Yarb er n ei t h er t es t i fi ed

, n o r cal l ed an y wi t n es s

.

In h er so l e cl ai m o f erro r on ap p eal

, Yarb er co m p l ai n s t h at t h e ju ry was al l o wed

t o h ear a reco rd in g o f t h e 9 1 1 cal l p laced at th e co l l i s i on s cen e b y t h e d ri v er o f t h e

o t h er v eh i cl e. T h e reco rd i n g cap t u red t h e d ri v er rep o rt i n g t o th e 9 1 1 o p erat o r, “ I ju s t

g o t h i t ,” t h en p ro vi d i n g t h e i nt ers ect i o n o f t h e co l l i s i o n

. Th e o p erat o r as k ed h i m to

rep eat h i s l o cat i o n

, an d h e d i d

, ad d i n g

, “ Th i s lad y ju s t ran i n t o m y car.” Th e o p erat o r

6as k ed fo r t h e c o l o r an d m ak e o f t h e v eh i cl es in v o l v ed

. Al t h o u g h t h e d ri v er b eg an

d es cri b i ng o ne o f t h e veh i cl es

, h e s oo n p au s ed

. W h en he s p o k e ag ai n

, he s ai d

, “ Oh

,

h ere’ s t h e co p ri g ht h ere.” Aft er w a r d

, t h e d ri v er’ s v o i ce can be h eard as p art o f t h e

b ack gro un d of t h e cal l : “

. . . th en ran i n t o m e

. . . t ap ped m e

. . . p u l led ri g h t i n fro nt

o f m e

. . . b u m

p ed m e

. ” Wh e n t h e cal l ab ru p t l y d i s co nn ect ed

, ab o ut a m i n u t e h ad

l ap s ed fro m

t h e d ri ver’ s i n i t i al rep o rt t o t h e 9 1 1 o p erat o r t h at “ I ju s t g o t h i t .”

As t h e reco rd rev eal s

, Yarb er s ou g h t a p ret ri al ru l i n g t o ex cl u d e t h e reco rd i n g,

o b ject i ng t h at t h e d ri v er’ s s t at em en t s were “ t es t i m o n i al in nat u re,” an d t h at

, b ecau s e

t h e st at e h ad ack n o wl e d g e d t h a t i t wo u l d n o t be cal l in g t h e d ri v er to t h e st an d

, h i s

reco rd ed s t at em en t s wo u l d v i o l at e h er ri g h t t o co n fro n t t h e d ri v er. 5 Th e t ri al co u rt

o v erru l ed Yarb er’ s o b

ject i o n

, n o t i ng t h at “ i t was a p h on e cal l m ad e at t h e ti m e o f t h e

5 T h e C o n fro n t at io n Cl au s e o f t he Si x t h Am en dm en t s t at es : “ In al l cri m i n a l

p ro s ecu ti o n s

, t h e accu s ed s h al l en jo y t h e ri g h t

. . . t o b e co n fro n t ed wi t h t h e wi t n es s es

ag ai n s t h im .” “ Th e co n fro n tat i o n cl au s e i m p o s es an ab so l u t e bar t o ad m it t i n g o u t -o fco u rt s t at em en t s i n ev i d en ce wh en t h ey are t es t i m o ni al i n n a t u r e, an d wh en t h e

d efen d an t d o es n o t h av e an o p p o rt u n i t y t o cro s s-ex am i n e t h e d ecl aran t .” Ga y v. S t a t e

, 2 7 9 Ga. 1 8 0

, 1 8 1 -1 8 2 (2 ) (6 11 SE2 d 3 1) (2 0 0 5 ), ci t i n g Cr a wf o r d v. W a s h i n g t o n

, 5 4 1

U. S. 3 6

, 4 0 (1 2 4 SCt 1 3 5 4

, 15 8 LE2 d 1 7 7 ) (2 0 0 4 ); Bi l l i n g s v. S t a t e

, 2 9 3 Ga. 9 9

, 1 0 3

(4 ) (7 4 5 SE2 d 5 8 3 ) (2 0 1 3) (“ Th e ad m is si o n o f an o u t-o f-co u rt s t at em en t i n to

ev i d en ce at a cri m i n al t ri al co m es wi t h i n t he sco p e o f t h e Co n fro n t at i o n Cl au s e o n l y

i f t h e s tat em en t was ‘ t es t im o ni al .’ ”) (ci t at io n s o m i t ted ).

7i n ci d en t

. . . t o rep o rt t h e in ci d e n t ,” 6 an d ad o pt i n g t h e s t at e’ s p o s it io n t h at t h e

reco rd ed s t at em en t s were ad m is s i b l e as t h e d ri ver’ s “ p res en t s en s e i m pres s i o n [s ]

. ” 7

Acco rd i ng t o Yarb er, t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y al l o wi ng t h e s tat e t o p res en t t o t h e

ju ry

[t he o t h er d ri v er’ s ] “ co n cl u s i o ns ” an d “ i m p res s io n ” o f h ow th e acci d en t

t o o k p l ace wi t h o u t s u b

ject i n g h i m t o cro ss -ex am i n at i o n b y t h e Defen s e.

Sai d 9 1 1 au d i o reco rd i n g was t h e o n ly ev i den ce o f an y

l es s s afe act o f

t h e Defen d an t

. [ci t .] Th is Co u rt s h o ul d rev ers e t h e t ri al co u rt an d ru l e

t h at

, u n d er th i s s et of fact s

, t h e 9 1 1 t ap e o f [t h e d ri ver] i s i n ad m i ss i b l e.

6 See Da vi s v. W

a s hi n g t o n

, 5 4 7 U. S. 8 1 3

, 8 2 2 (II) (1 2 6 S. Ct

. 2 2 66

, 1 6 5 LEd 2 d

2 2 4 ) ( 2 0 0 6 ) (“ St at em en t s are n o n t es t i m o ni al wh en m ad e i n th e co urs e o f p o l i ce

i n t erro g at i o n u n d er ci rcu m s t an ces o b ject i v el y i n d i cat i n g t h at t h e pri m ary p urp o s e o f

t h e in t erro gat i o n i s t o en ab l e p ol i ce as s i s t an ce t o m eet an o n g o i n g em erg en cy

. Th ey

are t es t i m o n i al wh en t h e ci rcu m s t an ces o b ject i vel y i n di cat e t h at t h ere is n o s u ch

o n g o i n g em erg en cy

, an d t h at t he pri m ary p u rp o s e o f t h e i n t erro g at i o n i s to es t a b l i s h

o r pr o ve p a s t even t

s p o ten t i al ly rel ev an t t o l a t er cri m i n al p ro s ecu ti o n .”) (fo o t n o t e

o m it t ed ; em

p h as i s s u pp l i ed ).

7 See Th oma s v. S ta te

, 28 4 Ga. 5 40

, 5 43 -5 4 4 (2 ) (6 6 8 SE2 d 7 1 1) (2 00 8 ) (“ On ce

a d et erm i n at i o n i s m a de t h at a s t at em en t i s n o n t es t i m o n i al i n n at u re, n orm al ru l es

reg ard i n g t h e ad m i s s i o n o f h ears ay ap p l y .”) (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 -8 -8 0 3 (1 ) (“ Th e fo l l o wi n g s h al l n o t b e ex cl u d ed b y t he h ears ay ru l e,

ev en t h o u g h t h e d ecl aran t i s av ai l ab le as a wi t n es s :

. . . Pr es en t s en s e i mp r es s i o n

. A

s t at em en t d es cri b i n g o r ex p l ai n i n g an ev en t o r co n d i t i o n m ad e wh il e t h e d ecl aran t

was p ercei v i n g t h e ev en t o r co n d i t i o n o r i m m ed i at el y t h ereaft er.”) (em p h as i s in

o ri g i nal ).

8Here, ev en as s um in g arg u en d o t h at t h e reco rd i n g s h o u l d h av e b een ex cl u d ed

u n d er Cr a wf

o r d v. W a s h i n g t o n 8 an d i t s p ro g en y

, 9 t h e req u i s i t e h arm d i d n o t res u l t

. 1 0

8 Su p ra.

9 See, e.g

., fo o t n o t es 5 an d 6

, su p ra; s ee fu rt her, e.g

., Da vi s

, su p ra at 8 2 3 (III)

(A), n

. 2 (“ If 91 1 op erat o rs are n o t t h em s el v es law en fo rcem en t o ffi cers

, t h ey m ay at

l eas t b e ag en t s o f l aw e nfo rcem en t w h en t h ey co nd u ct i n t erro g at io n s o f 9 11 cal l ers .”);

Pi t t s v. S t a t e

, 2 80 G a. 2 8 8 -2 9 0 (6 2 7 SE2 d 17 ) (2 0 0 6 ) (h o l d i n g t h at “ t he d et erm i n at i o n

o f w h et h er t h e reco rd i n g o f a 9 11 p h o n e cal l i s t es t i m on i al s h o u l d b e m ad e o n a cas eb y- cas e b as i s ,” an d n o t i ng th at a 9 1 1 reco rd i n g was n o n t es t i m o n ial “ wh ere t h e c a l l

was m ad e wh i l e t h e cri m e was i n p ro gres s

, b y a p an i ck ed cal l er wh o s e p ri m ary

p u rp os e was t o s eek as s i st an ce t o prev en t t h e co m pl et i o n o f an o n g o i ng cri m e”); s ee

al s o B r o wn v

. S t a t e

, 2 88 Ga. 40 4

, 4 0 8 (3 ) (7 0 3 SE2 d 6 2 4 ) (2 0 1 0 ) (ex p l ai ni n g t h at

wh ere t h e v i ct im ’ s s t a t em en t of “ p as t ev en t s was d el i v ered at so me r emo ve i n t i me

f r om t h e d a n g er s h e des cr i bed an d was n o t p ro v id i n g i n fo rm at i o n en ab li n g o ffi cers

i m m ed i at el y t o en d a t h reat en i n g s it u at io n ,” t h e s t at em en t was t es t i m o n i al i n n at u re)

(em p h as i s s u p p li ed ); W

r i g h t v. S t a t e, 2 8 5 Ga. 5 7 , 6 0 (3 ) (a) (6 7 3 SE2 d 2 4 9 ) (2 0 0 9 )

(reas o n i ng t h at “ s t at em en t s [m ad e] i n res p on s e t o a q u es t i o n b y l aw en fo rcem en t aft er

t h e em erg en cy h ad al read y en d ed an d were refl ect i v e o f p as t ev en t s

. . . were

t es t i m o ni al i n n at u re”) (ci t at i o n s o m i t t ed ). Cf. Owen s v. S t a t e

, 3 29 G a. A p p

. 4 5 5 -4 5 8

(1 ) (a) (7 6 5 SE2 d 6 5 3 ) (2 0 1 4 ) (d et erm i n i n g t h at t h e v i ct i m ’ s cal l s t o 9 1 1 co n cern i n g

a d o m es t i c d i s p u t e were n o n t e s t i m o n i al

, wh ere t h e fi rs t cal l was m ad e wh i l e t h e

v i ct i m was s t i l l i n t h e h o u s e wi t h t h e d efen d an t an d t h e seco n d cal l was m ad e a ft er

t h e v ict i m h ad fl ed t h e h o u s e, b u t rem ai n ed i n t he res i d en t i al area an d t h u s fearfu l t h at

t h e defen d an t wo u l d “ s t art lo ok i n g fo r” h i m

, an d w h ere t ri al co u rt red act ed p o rt i on s

o f cal l arg u ab l y

i n v o l v i n g v i ct i m ’ s n arrat i on o f p as t ev en t s ).

1 0 See g en era l l y H

a t ley

, s u p ra at 4 8 5 (II) (res o l v i n g wh et h er an y erro r was

h arm l es s b ey o nd a reas o n ab l e d o u b t, wh il e decl i n i n g t o d et erm i n e wh et her o u t -o fco u rt s t at em en t s were t es t im o n i al o r n o n -t es t i m o n i al

, wh er e t h e o u t -o f-co u rt

s t at em en t s co ul d n o t b e “ cat eg o ri zed e a s i l y [as t es t i m o ni al o r n o n -t es t i m o ni al ]

b ecau s e t h e m o m en t w h en p ol i ce n eu t ral i zed an y t h reat t o t h e p u b li c [was ] u ncl ear”).

9An erro r o f co n s t i t u t i o nal m ag n i t u d e can b e h arm l es s w hen “ t h e ev i d en ce at i s s u e i s

cu m u l at i v e of o t h er p ro p erl y -ad m i t t ed ev i den ce o r wh en th e ev i d en ce a g ai n s t t h e

d efen d an t i s o v erwh el m i n g

. ” 1 1

Yarb er ch al l en g es h er D UI (l es s s afe) co nv i ct i o n o n t h e g ro u n d t h at t h e

reco rd i n g s u p p l i ed t h e o n l y ev i d en ce o f an es s en t ial el em en t

– a “ l es s s afe act ,” b ut

h er arg u m en t m i s co n s t ru es Geo rg i a l aw. “ [C] o m m is si o n o f a n u n s a f

e a ct is n o t an

el em en t of t h at c r i m e

. T h erefo re, i t was no t i n cu m ben t u p on th e s t at e t o p ro v e t h at

[Yarb er] co m

m i tt ed an u n s afe act wh i l e [s ] h e was b eh i n d t h e wh eel .” 1 2

M o reo v er, ev en wi t h ou t t h e 9 1 1 reco rd i n g, t h ere was ov erwh el m i n g ev i d en ce

t h at Yarb er was g u il t y o f DUI (l es s s afe). Th ro ug h t h e tes t i m on y o f t h e o ffi cers

, t h e

s t at e s h o wed t h at wi t h in m o m en t s o f t h e co l l i s i o n, Yarb er ad m i t t ed t h at s h e h ad ju s t

l eft a cl u b

, t h at s h e h ad recen t l y co n s u m ed al co h o l i c bev erag es

, an d th at s h e h ad b een

t h e d ri ver o f h er v eh icl e wh en i t co l l i d ed wi t h an o t h er o n e. Th e res u l t s o f t h e Al co

1 1 Br o wn

, su p ra (ci t at i o n o m it t ed ); s ee Ha t l ey

, s u p ra at 4 84 (II) (“ [W ] h en

h e a r s a y e v i d en ce i s erro n eo u s ly ad m i t ted i n v io lat i on of t h e Co n fro n t at i o n Cl au s e,

t h e erro r can b e d eem e d h a r m l e s s b ey on d a reas o n ab l e d ou b t wh ere th e h ears ay i s

cu m u l at i v e o f o th er ad m i s s i b l e ev i d en ce.”); Va ug h n v. S t a te

, 2 48 Ga. 1 2 7 , 1 3 1 -1 3 2

(2 ) (2 8 1 SE2 d 5 9 4 ) (1 9 8 1 ) (“ Ov erwh el m i ng ev i d en ce o f t h e d e f e n d an t ’ s g u i l t can

n eg at e t h e p o s s i b i li t y th at t h e co n s t i t ut i o nal erro r co n t ri b u ted t o t h e co n vi ct i o n .”)

(ci t at i o n o m i tt ed ).

1 2 Br en t v. S t a t e

, 2 7 0 Ga. 1 6 0

, 1 6 1 (1 ) (5 10 SE2 d 1 4 ) (1 9 98 ) (ci t at i on s o m i t t ed ).

10Sen so r t es t s ho wed t h at Yarb er h ad co n s u m ed al co h o l

, a n d th e o d o r o f al co h o l i c

b ev erag e e m i t t i n g fro m h er b reat h was s t ro ng

. Yarb er’ s ey es were wat ery an d

b l o o d s h o t

. Her s p eech was s l u rred an d m u m b l ed

. An d at t im es

, s h e was i n co h eren t

.

Sh e was “ s l o w to res po nd ” t o a ru d im en t ary req ues t by p o l i ce fo r h er d ri v er’ s l i cen s e.

Sh e was un ab l e t o co n v ey wh et h er s h e un d ers t oo d th e i ns t ru ct i o n s fo r t h e HGN t es t

.

Sh e fai l ed t o fo l l ow p rel i m i n a ry i n s t ru ct i o n s i n co n n ect i o n wi t h t h e wal k an d t u rn

t es t

. Du ri n g h e r r o ad s id e en co u n t er wi t h p o l i ce, h er b o d y “ s w ay ed

, ” an d s h e t wi ce

s t um b l ed

, n earl y fal l i n g to th e g ro u n d

. An d wh en th e o ffi cer t h ereaft er at tem p t ed to

ch em i cal l y t es t Yarb er’ s b reat h

, sh e ei th er co u ld n o t o r w o u l d n o t co m p l y wi th

rep eat ed i n s tru ct i o n s an d d em on s t rat i o n s s o as t o p ro v i d e a s u ffi ci en t b reat h s am p l e.

Gi v en t h e fo reg oi n g

, t h ere was o v erwh el m i n g ev id en ce t h at Yarb er h ad co m m i t t ed

DUI (l es s s afe). 1 3

Tu rn i n g t o th e t raffi c i n fract i o n s, we reach a s i m i l ar co n cl u s i on

. Ev en wi t h o ut

t h e 9 1 1 reco rd in g

, t h ere w as o v erwh el m i n g ev i d en ce th at Yarb er was g u il t y o f fai l u re

1 3 See Mo r

g a n v. S t a te

, 1 8 1 Ga. Ap p

. 1 5 0

, 1 5 1 (3 51 SE2 d 4 97 ) (1 9 8 6 )

(d et erm i n i n g t h at t h e ev i d en ce o f DUI l es s s afe co n v i ct i o n wa s overwh el m i n g, wh ere,

d es p it e l ack o f ev i den ce o f fi el d s o b ri et y t e s t s

, d efen d an t h ad cras h ed h i s v eh i cl e,

fal l en do wn w h il e ex i t i n g h i s car, h ad a st ro n g o d o r o f al co h o l o n h i m

, c o u l d n o t

s t an d al o ne, h ad b l o o d sh o t ey es

, an d ex h i b i t ed s p eech s o s l u rred h e co u l d h ard l y b e

u n d ers t o o d ).

11t o m ai n t ai n l an e an d i m p ro p er t u rn at an i n ters ect i o n . Th ro u g h t h e t es ti m o n y o f t h e

o ffi cers

, t h e st at e s h o wed th at po l i ce fo u n d Y arb er i n t h e d ri v er’ s s eat o f h er v eh i cl e,

w i t h i t s en g i n e s ti l l ru n n i n g

, an d t h e v eh i cl e p o s i t i o ned “ d i rect l y i n fro n t o f t h e

s eco n d v eh i cl e i n vo l v ed .” W hen Yarb er w as as k ed b y an i n v es t i g at in g o ffi cer wh at

h ad h ap pen ed i n t h e ap p aren t co l l i s i o n

, s he d es cri b ed o n l y her m an eu v er o f m ak i n g

a ri g ht t u rn fro m o n e s t reet o n t o an o t h er. In deed

, t h e o ffi cer wi th a back g ro u n d in

i n v es t i g at i n g car acci d en t s t es ti fi ed an d i l l u s t rat ed t h at Yarb er h ad b een at t em p t i n g

t o m ak e a ri g h t t u rn wh en s h e “ t u rn ed wi d e” an d i nt o t he p at h o f t h e s eco n d v eh i cl e

t h at was w ai ti ng t o t u rn l eft

. An d as ex pl ai ned ab o v e, t h e st at e ad d u ced

o v erwh el m i ng ev i d en ce t h at at t h e t i m e Yarb er’ s v eh i cl e co l li d ed wi t h t h e o t h er, s h e

was u nd er th e i n fl u en ce o f al co h o l t o th e ex t en t t h at i t was les s s afe fo r h er t o d ri v e. 1 4

Becau s e Yarb er’ s cl ai m

t h at t h e “ 9 1 1 au d io reco rd i n g was t h e o n l y ev i d en ce

o f an y l es s s afe act ” i s u n av ai l i n g

, b ecau s e t h e d ri v er’ s st at em en t s t o t he 9 1 1 o p erat o r

were cu m u l at i v e o f o t h er ad m i ss i b l e ev i d en ce, an d b ecau s e t h e ev i d en ce ad d u ced

–

ex cl u d i n g t h e o t h er d ri ver’ s s t at em en t s t o t h e 9 11 o p erat o r

– as t o al l ch arg es ag ai n s t

1 4 See g en eral l y Du n n v. S t a t e

, 2 9 1 Ga. 5 5 1

, 5 5 2 (2 ) (7 3 2 SE2 d 5 24 ) ( 2 0 1 2 )

(d et erm i n i n g t h at t h e ev id en ce was o v erwh el m i n g

, b as ed u p on th e ev i d en ce co l l ect ed

at t he s cen e o f t h e cri m e an d d efen d an t ’ s o wn ad m is s i o n ).

12h er was o v erwh el m i n g

, an y erro r i n ad m i t t i n g t h e reco rd i n g was h arm l es s b ey o n d a

reas on ab l e d o u b t

. 1 5

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Di l l ar d

a n d Pet er s o n , JJ., co ncu r

.

1 5 See Ha tl ey

, su p ra at 48 5 (II) (ex p l ai n i n g t h at an y erro r i n ad m i t t i n g t h e o u t

o f-co u rt s t at em en t s was h arm l es s bey o n d a reas on ab le d ou b t, g i v e n t h e cu m u l at i v e

n at u re o f t h e co n t es t ed s t at em en t s an d t h e r e m a i ni n g o verwh el m i ng ev i d en ce); s ee

al s o Bel l v. S ta te

, 2 9 4 Ga. 4 4 3

, 4 4 8 (3 ) (7 5 4 SE2 d 3 2 7) (2 01 4 ) (“ E v en t h o u g h [o u t -o fco u rt ] s t at em en t s t o t h e o ffi cer were t es t i m o ni al i n n a t u r e an d th u s were s ub ject to

ex cl u s i o n pu rs u an t t o th e Co n fro n t at i o n Cl au s e p ro t ect i on s s et fo rt h i n Cr a w f o r d [,

s u p ra,] ad m i ss io n o f t h i s t es ti m o n y was h arm l es s b ey o n d a reas o n ab l e d o u bt b ecau s e

i t was cu m

ul at i v e o f o t h er ad m i s s i b l e ev id en ce.”); Br o wn

, s u p ra (d et erm i n i n g t h at t h e

ad m i s s i o n o f h ears ay ad m i t t ed i n v i o l at i o n o f Cr a wf o rd

, s u p ra, was h arm l es s erro r

b ecau s e t h e h ears ay was cu m u l at i v e o f o t h e r e v i d en ce, n am el y t he t es ti m o n y o f

o ffi cers wh o h ad res p o n d ed t o em erg en cy cal ls fo r as s i st an ce).

13