THI RD DI VI SI ON

M C FA DDEN, C. J.

, D OYLE, P. J.

, and HODGES, J.

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.

https ://w w w

. ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s

D E A D LIN E S A R E N O LO N G E R TO LLE D IN T

H I S

C O U R T. A LL FILIN G S M U ST B E S U B M I TTE D WITH IN

TH E TIM E S S E T B Y

O U R C O U R T R U LE S

.

June 15, 2020



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A2 0 A0 51 2 . SM ITH v . THE STATE. DO-0 1 9 C

D O Y LE , Pres i d i n g J u d g e.

Fo l l owi n g a ju ry t ri al

, Qu i n cy A. Sm i t h was co n v i ct ed o f fi rs t deg ree v eh i cu l ar

h o m i ci d e 1 pred i cat ed o n d ri v in g u n d er t h e i n fl u en ce (“ DUI”) p er s e. 2 He ap p eal s h i s

co n vi ct i o n

, co n t en d i n g t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y : (1 ) ad m i t t i n g ev i d en ce o f a p ri o r

arres t fo r DUI u nd er OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 0 4 (b ); (2 ) d e n yi n g h i s m o t i o n t o s u p p res s

ev i d en ce fro m h i s ro ad s i d e en co u n t er wi t h p o l i ce; (3 ) al lo wi n g th e St at e t o i m p each

h i m wi t h s t at em en t s h e m ad e d u ri n g a p ri or b on d h eari n g ; an d (4 ) d en y in g h i s req u es t

1 OCGA § 4 0 -6 -3 9 3 (a).

2 OCGA § 4 0 -6 0 -3 9 1 (a) (5 ). Sm it h al s o was fo u n d g u il t y o f a s eco n d co u n t o f

v eh icu l ar h o m i ci d e b as ed o n DUI l es s s afe (OCGA § 4 0 -6 -3 9 1 (a) (1 )) as wel l as a

co rres p o n d i n g DUI-l es s -s afe co u n t

. A l l o f t h e c o u n t s m erg ed i n t o t he v eh i cu l ar

h o m i ci d e b as ed o n t h e DUI-p er-s e co u n t

.fo r a ju ry i n s t ru ct i o n o n pro xi m at e cau s e. Fo r t h e reas o n s th at fo ll o w, w e affi rm

.

Co n st ru ed in f

av o r o f t h e v erd i ct

, 3 t h e ev i d en ce s ho ws t h at i n March 2 0 1 5,

Sm it h ’ s wi fe wo k e h im u p t o dri v e h er t o ch u rch at ap pro x i m at el y 7 : 0 0 a.m

. Aft er

d ro p pi n g o ff h i s wi fe, Sm it h beg an t o m ak e t h e s h o rt ret urn t ri p h o m e

, a n d a s h e

t u rn ed l eft i n t o h i s su b di v i s io n

, h e fai l ed to y i el d t o an o n co m i n g m o t o rcy cl i s t

,

cau s i n g t h e o perat o r t o s l am i n t o t h e pas s en g er s i d e o f h i s v eh i cl e. Th e m ot o rcy cl i s t

d i ed at t he s cen e.

Sm i t h i m m ed i at el y m an eu v ered h i s v eh i cl e b ack t o th e cras h s i t e wh ere h e

ch eck ed t h e v i ct i m

, wh o was m o t i on l es s. Sh o rt l y t hereaft er, o t h er d ri v ers s t o p p ed to

ren d er ai d

, an d l aw en fo rcem en t o ffi cers s o o n arri v ed

. Sh eri f f ’s Dep u t y J o s ep h

Po u n d s w a s a m o n g t h e fi rs t t o arri v e, an d h e s p ok e wi t h Sm i t h

, w h o s t at ed t h at h e

was m ak i n g t he l eft t u rn an d d i d n o t s ee t h e m o t o rcy cl is t

. Po u n d s v i ewed t he d am ag e

t o Sm i t h ’ s v eh i cl e as co n si s t en t wi t h an i m p act t o t he pas s en ger s i d e

, a n d Po u nd s

o b s erv ed t he o d or o f al co h o l o n Sm i t h ’ s b reat h

. Bas ed on t h is

, Po u n d s p ro ceed ed to

s ecu re t h e s cen e an d cal led t he Geo rg i a St at e Pat ro l t o i n ves t i g at e.

3 See S h o rt v. S t a t e , 2 3 4 Ga. Ap p

. 6 3 3

, 6 34 (1 ) (5 0 7 SE2 d 5 14 ) (1 9 9 8 ).

2St at e T ro op er Sh el do n Os b y res po n de d to th e cal l an d s p o k e fi rs t t o Po u n d s

,

wh o s tat ed t h at Sm i t h was “ p os s i b l y i m p ai red

, ” an d t h en h e s p o k e t o Sm i t h

, wh o was

wai t i n g in Os b y ’ s v eh i cl e d ue t o rai n

. Sm it h ex pl ai ned t o Os by t h at h e t u rn ed l eft in

fro n t o f t he m o t o rcy cl e, an d t h e t ro o p er, w h o was t rai n e d i n D U I i n v es ti gat i o n an d

fi el d s o b ri et y ev al u at i o n s

, n o t i ced a s t ro n g o d o r of al co h ol i c b ev erag e fro m Sm i t h ’ s

b reat h

. Os b y as k ed Sm i t h ab o ut t h e o d o r, an d Sm i t h rep li e d t h a t he h ad co n s u m ed

t wo b eers ap p ro x i m at el y t wo h o u rs p ri o r t o d ri v in g

. Os b y th en as k ed i f Sm i t h wo u ld

s u b m i t t o a fi el d s o bri et y ev al u at i o n , an d Sm i t h ag reed

. Sm i t h p erfo rm ed p o o rl y o n

each p h as e o f th e fi el d s o bri et y ev al u at io n

, an d hi s b reat h in d i cat ed a p o s i t i v e res u l t

f o r al co ho l b as ed o n an Al co -Sen s o r t es t

. Bas ed on t h is

, Os b y p l aced Sm i t h u n d e r

arres t an d read h i m t h e i m p l i ed co ns en t w arn i n g fo r ad d it i o n a l t es ti n g

, an d Sm i th

ag reed t o a b lo o d t es t fo r al co h o l

.

An o th er o ffi cer t ran s p ort ed Sm i t h t o t h e l o cal jai l t o h av e h i s b l o o d d rawn

,

wh i ch o ccu rred at ap p ro x i m at el y 8 : 4 7 a.m

., ap p ro x im at el y o n e-an d -a-h al f h o u rs aft er

t h e co l li s i o n

. Th e res u l t o f t h e b l o o d t es t in d i cat e d a b l o o d al co h o l co n cen t rat i o n

(“ BAC”) o f .1 36

.

Bas ed o n t h es e ev en ts , Sm i t h was ch arg ed wi t h h o m i ci d e b y v eh i cl e t h ro u g h

DUI l es s s afe (Co un t 1 ), v eh i cu l ar h o m ici d e t h ro u g h DUI p er s e (Co un t 2 ), DUI l es s

3s afe (Co u n t 3 ), an d DUI p er se (Co u n t 4 ). A ju ry fo un d h i m g u i l t y o f al l co u n t s

, an d

t h e t ri al co u rt en t ered a 12 -y ear s en t en ce o n Co u nt 2

, m erg i n g t h e rem ai n in g co u n t s

i n t o t h at co u n t . Sm i t h n o w ap p eal s

.

1

. Sm it h co n t en ds t h at t h e t ri al co urt erred b y ad m i t t i n g ev i den ce o f a p ri o r

DUI arres t p u rs u an t t o OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 0 4 (b ). Bas ed o n t h e reco rd i n t hi s cas e, t h i s

en u m erat i o n p res en t s n o b as is fo r rev ers al

.

Un d er OCGA § § 2 4 -4 -4 0 4 (b ) an d 2 4-4 -4 0 3,

[e] v i d en ce o f o t h er cri m es

, w r o n g s

, or act s s h al l n o t b e ad m i s s i bl e t o

p ro v e t h e ch aract er o f a p ers o n i n o rd er t o s h o w act i o n in co n fo rm i t y

t h erewi th [, b u t s u ch ] ex t r i n s i c act ev i d en ce m ay b e ad m it t ed i f a

t h ree-p art t es t i s m et : (1 ) t h e ev i d en ce is rel ev an t t o an i s s u e i n t h e cas e

o t h er t h an t h e d efen d an t ’ s ch aract er, (2 ) th e p ro b at i v e v al u e i s n o t

s u b s t an t i al l y o u t wei g h ed b y t h e d an g er o f u n fai r preju d ice as req u i red

b y R u l e 4 0 3

, an d (3 ) t h ere i s s u ffi ci en t p ro of fo r a ju ry t o fi nd b y a

p rep on d eran ce o f t h e ev i d en ce t h at th e d ef e n dan t co m

m i t t ed t h e p ri o r

act

. 4

Pri o r t o tri al

, t h e St at e p ro v i d ed n o t i ce o f i t s in ten t t o in t ro d u ce ev i d en ce t h at

Sm it h was arres t ed i n J un e 20 14 aft er an o ffi cer ob s erv ed h i m d ri v i n g errat i cal l y wi th

an i n ju ry t o hi s h ead

, a b r o k en wi n d s h i el d

, an d a ro ad s i g n “ wrap p ed aro u n d [h i s ]

4 Jo n es v. St a t e

, 3 0 1 Ga. 5 4 4

, 5 4 4 (8 0 2 SE2 d 2 3 4 ) (2 0 17 ), q u o t i n g OCGA § 2 4

-

4 -4 0 4 (b ) an d ci t i n g Ol d

s v. S t a t e , 2 99 Ga. 6 5 (2 ) (7 8 6 SE2 d 6 3 3 ) (2 0 1 6 ).

4v eh icl e.” In h is ro ad s i d e i n t eract i o n wi t h Sm it h

, th e o ffi cer o b serv ed an o d o r o f

al co h o l o n Sm i t h ’ s b reat h an d

, b as ed o n h i s i nt eract i o n wi t h Sm it h

, b el i ev ed h i m to

b e “ d ru n k .” Sm i t h un s ucces s fu l l y m o v ed i n l i m i n e t o ex cl u d e t h i s ev i d en ce, an d at

t ri al

, t h e co u rt ad m i t t ed t h e ev i den ce fo r t h e p urp o s e o f p ro v i n g Sm i t h ’ s k no wl ed ge,

i n t en t , an d ab s en ce o f m i s t ak e o r acci d en t

. Sm i t h n o w as s ert s t h at t h i s was erro r.

As a t h res h o ld m at t er, w e n o t e t h at Sm i t h was o n l y s en t en ced o n Co u n t 2

, i

. e.,

fi rs t d eg ree v eh icu l a r h o m ici d e b as ed o n DUI p er s e, an d t h e rem ai n i ng co u n t s

m erg ed i nt o t h at co un t

. T h i s res u l t s i n a c o n v i c t i o n o n l y as t o Co un t 2 becau s e t h e

g u i l t y verd i ct s o n t h e o t h er c o u n t s are n o t eq ui v al en t t o a fi n al j u d gm en t o f

co n vi ct i o n

. 5 Acco rd i ng l y

, an y erro r as t o t h o se co u n t s i s m o o t

. 6

W i t h res p ect to t he v eh i cu l ar h o m i ci de p red icat ed o n DUI p er s e, t h e ad m i s s i o n

o f o t h er act s ev i d en ce, ev en i f erro n eo u s

, can b e h arm l es s i f t h ere is o v erwh el m i n g

ev i d en ce t o s u p p o rt t h e g u i l ty v erd i ct s u ch t h at “ i t i s h i g h ly p ro b ab le t h at th e erro r d id

5 See S l a ck v. S ta te

, 2 8 8 G a

. 6 5 9

, 6 6 1 (7 0 6 SE2 d 4 4 7 ) (2 0 11 ) (“ [U] n d er o u r

cri m i n al co d e, a ‘ co n v ict i o n ’ i s d efi n ed as in cl u d i n g ‘ a fi n al ju d g m en t of co n v i ct i o n

en t ered u p o n a v e r di ct o r fi n d i n g o f g u i l t y of a cri m e o r u p o n a p l ea of g u i l t y .’ ”),

q u o t i n g O CGA § 1 6-1 -3 (4 ). See al s o Co ll i n s v. S t a t e

, 3 2 7 Ga. Ap p

. 59 0

, 5 9 2 (7 6 0

SE2 d 6 0 6 ) (2 0 1 4); D u rr a n ce v. S t a t e

, 3 1 9 Ga. Ap p. 8 66

, n

. 1 (7 3 8 SE2 d 6 92 ) (2 0 1 3 )

(Defen d an t “ was no t co n v ict ed o f t h e DUI l es s safe o ffen s e

. . . becau s e t h e t ri al co u rt

m erg ed [t h at ] o ffen s e i n t o t he DUI p er s e ch arg e.”).

6 See Du r ra n ce , 3 1 9 Ga. Ap p

. at 8 6 6 n

. 2

.

5n o t co n t ri b u te t o t h e v erd i ct .” 7 F o r e x am pl e, i n Jo n es v. S t a t e

, 8 t h e Su p rem e Co u rt

ex am i n ed a D UI-p er-s e co n v i ct i o n a n d d et erm i n ed t h at d ue t o t h e “ v ery l o w”

p r o b at i ve v al u e o f a p ri o r DUI co n v i ct i o n t o s h o w i n t en t

, i t w as erro r t o ad m i t t h e

ev i d en ce i n a t ri al o n a n ew D UI-p er-s e co u nt

. 9 N ev ert h el es s

, b ecau se t he co n v i ct i o n

was fo r DUI p er se, an d t h e ev i d en ce was u n co n tro v ert ed t h at “ ap p el lan t was d ri v i n g

h i s v eh i cl e; ap pel l an t ad m i tt ed h e h ad co n s u m ed al co ho l t h at ev en i n g ; an d t h e b reat h

t es t s sh o wed ap p el l an t ’ s BAC was s u b s t an t i al l y i n ex ce s s o f 0 .0 8 g ram s

. . . t h e

erro neo u s ad m i s s i o n o f t h e p ri o r DUI was u l t i m at el y h arm l es s .” 1 0

Si m i l arl y

, i n t h e p res en t ca s e, t h ere w as cl ear s u rv ei l l an ce v i d eo fo o t ag e

s h o wi n g t h e cras h

, Sm i t h ad m i tt ed t h at h e was th e d ri ver o f th e v eh i cl e t h at co l l i d ed

wi t h t h e m o t o rcy cl e an d th at h e h ad b een d ri n k i n g al co ho l b e f o re d ri v i ng

, an d h i s

b l o o d t es t rev eal ed a BAC w el l i n ex ces s of t he .0 8 l eg al l i m i t

. Th u s

, th e ev i d en ce

t h at Sm i t h co m

m it t ed DUI p er s e w as o verwh el m i n g

. Li kewi s e, t h ere w as no d i s p u t e

t h at Sm i t h was dri vi ng th e veh i cl e th at k i ll ed t h e m ot o rcy cl is t, t h ereb y cau s i n g h i s

7 See Jo n es , 3 0 1 Ga. at 5 5 1 (3 ).

8 Id

.

9 See i d . at 5 4 9 -5 5 0 (2 ).

1 0 Id . at 55 1 (3 ).

6d eat h

. 1 1 Acco rd i n g l y

, p rete r m i t t i n g wh et h er t h e t ri al co urt erred b y ad m i t t i n g t h e p ri o r

DUI arres t

, i t i s h i g h l y p ro b ab l e t h a t a n y r e s u l t i n g erro r d id n o t co n t ri b u t e t o t h e

g u il t y v erd i ct as t o t h e v eh icu l ar h o m i ci de co u nt pred i cat ed o n DUI p er s e, an d t h e

i m p act o f s u ch a p o t en t i al erro r o n t he o t h er co u n t s i s m o o t d u e t o m erg er. 1 2

2

. Sm i t h n ex t arg u es t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y d en y in g h i s m o ti o n t o s u p p res s

t h e res u l t s o f h i s b l o od t es t

, fi el d so b r i et y ev al u at i o n s

, an d st at em en t s h e m ad e to

p o l i ce at t h e s cen e. Sp eci fi cal l y

, Sm i t h arg u es t hat al l o f t h e ev i d en ce g at h ered at t h e

ro ad s i d e s h o u ld h av e b een su p p res s ed b ecau s e h e w as no t Mi r a n d iz ed 1 3 at t h e t i m e

t h e ev i d en ce was o b t ai n ed . W e d i s ag ree.

In rev i ewi ng a t ri al co urt ’ s ru l i n g o n a m o t i o n t o s u p p res s

, an

ap p el l at e c o u r t m

u s t co n s t ru e t he reco rd i n t h e l i gh t m o s t fav o rab l e t o

t h e fact u al fi nd i n g s an d j u d g m en t o f t h e tri al co u rt an d accep t t h e t ri al

co u rt ’ s fi n d i n gs o f di sp u t ed fact s un l es s t h ey are cl earl y erro n eo us

.

1 1 See OCGA § 4 0 -6 -3 9 3 (a) (“ An y p ers o n w h o

, wi t h o u t m al i ce afo ret h o u g h t

,

c a u s e s t h e d eat h o f an o t h er p ers o n t h ro u g h t h e v i o l at i on o f [t h e DUI s t at u t e]

. . .

co m m i t s t h e o ffen s e o f h o m i ci d e b y v eh i cl e i n t he fi rs t d eg ree. . . .”).

1 2 See Jo n es

, 3 0 1 Ga. at 5 5 1 (3 ).

1 3 See Mi r an d

a v. Ar i z o n a

, 3 84 U. S. 4 3 6 (8 6 SCt 1 6 02

, 1 6 LE2 d 69 4 ) (1 9 6 6 ).

7Ho wev er, t he t ri al co u rt ’ s ap p l i cat i o n o f t h e l aw t o u nd i sp u t ed fact s i s

s u b ject t o d e n o v o rev i ew. 1 4

Here, u p o n arri vi ng at t h e s cen e, Dep u t y Po u n d s i n i t i al l y en co u n t ered Sm i th

“ s t an d i ng aro u n d ” o u t si d e of h i s v eh icl e an d sp o k e t o Sm i t h to det erm i n e wh o was

i n v o l v ed an d wh at had hap p en ed

. Sm i t h t ol d h i m t h at h e was ret u rn i n g fro m d ro p p i n g

o ff h is wi fe an d “ t h at h e was m ak i n g a l eft t u rn i n t o t h e s u bd i v i s i o n an d d i d n ’ t s ee t h e

m o to rcy cl e.” Po u n ds n ot i ced an o do r o f al co h o l on Sm it h ’ s b reat h

, an d Sm i th

m en t i o n ed t h at h e h ad b een o ut d u ri n g t h e n ig ht b efo re h i s wi fe wo k e hi m up t o d ri v e

h er t o ch urch

. By t h i s ti m e, i t h ad b eg u n rai n i ng h eav i l y

, s o Po un d s had Sm i t h s i t in

t h e b ack s eat o f h is p o li ce cru i s er wh i l e t h ey t al k ed fu rt he r

, “ t o g e t o u t of t h e rai n ”

an d b ecau s e “ I h ad n o ro o m i n m y fro n t s eat .” Po u nd s t es t i fi ed at t h e su p p res s i o n

h eari n g t hat du ri n g t h at t i m e, h e al l o wed Sm i t h to get o u t of h i s v eh i cl e t o u ri n at e an d

t o s m o k e a ci garet t e: “ we were t ry i n g t o s t ay o u t o f th e rai n

. It ’ s real l y rai n in g

, s o I’ m

n o t t ry i n g t o g et wet

. He was y ou k n o w, h e co u l d hav e s t ay ed o u t th ere i f h e wan t ed

t o

, bu t h e g o t i n

. Bu t t h en h e g et s b ack o u t a co u pl e o f t i m es

, act u al l y .” At n o t i m e d id

Po u n d s t el l Sm i t h h e was u n d er arres t , n o r d i d h e p l ace Sm i t h i n h an dcu ffs

.

1 4 (Pu n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) S t at e v. Bl az ek

, 3 5 3 Ga. Ap p. 1 2 7

, 1 2 8 (8 3 6 SE2 d

2 1 3 ) (2 0 1 9 ).

8Aft er ap p ro x im at el y 2 0 m i n u t es

, Tro o p er Os b y arri v ed an d es co rt ed Sm i t h to

h i s p at ro l v eh i cl e. Th ey

s p o k e wh i l e s t an d in g i n fro n t o f Os b y ’ s v eh i cl e, an d Sm i th

ex p lai n ed th at h e t u rn ed l e f t an d di d n o t s ee t he on co m i ng m o t o rcy cl e. As Sm i th

s p o k e, Os b y

n o ti ced an o do r o f al co ho l co m i ng fro m Sm i t h ’ s b reat h

, so h e as k ed i f

Sm it h h ad b een d ri n ki n g

. Sm i t h g av e co nfl i ct in g an s wers b ut ad m i t t e d t h a t h e h ad

co n su m ed “ a co up l e o f b eers a co u p l e o f h o u rs p ri o r t o d ri v in g .” Os b y as k ed Sm i th

i f h e w o u l d “ s u b m i t t o a few fi el d s o b ri et y t es t s,” an d Sm i t h ag reed to d o so

. Os by

ad m i n is t ered a h o ri zo nt al g aze n y s t ag m u s tes t

, w al k an d tu rn

, o n e l eg s t an d

, an d an

Al co -Sen s o r t es t

. Bas ed o n t he res u l t s o f th e fi el d ev al u at i o n s, each of w h i ch read i l y

i n d i cat ed i m

p ai rm en t (o r t h e p r e s e n ce of al co h o l i n t h e b reat h t es t ), Os by p l aced

Sm it h u n d er arres t fo r DUI. Os b y t hen read h i m t h e im p l i ed co n s en t warn i n g fo r a

b l o o d t es t , an d Sm i t h i n it i al l y d ecl in ed b u t i m

m ed i at el y ch an g ed hi s m i nd t o t ak e a

b l o o d t es t : “ At fi rs t h e s ai d n o

. Th en I s ai d

, y o u k n o w, ‘ Yo u s ai d n o ? ’ Th en h e s ai d

y es

. I s ai d

, ‘ Are y o u s u re? ’ He s ai d

, y es

, ‘ Yes

, I am .’ ” Sm it h was t h en t ran s p o rt ed to

t h e l o cal jai l , wh ere a b l o o d t es t was ad m i n i s t ered

.

Sm i t h co n t en d s t h at t h e s t a t em en t s h e m ad e, t he fi el d s o b ri et y t es t s

, an d t h e

b l o o d t es t s h o u l d h av e b een su p p res s ed b ecau s e h e w as n ev er read h i s M i r a n d a

ri gh t s.

9Th e req ui r e m e n t t o g i v e a Mi r a n d a warn i n g d oes n o t ap p l y u n t i l a

p ers on i s act u al l y i n cu s t o d y o r o t herwi s e d ep ri v ed o f [h i s ] freed o m o f

act i o n i n s o m e s i g n i fi can t way

. In m ak i n g t h i s d et erm i nat i o n

, a c o u rt

m u s t ex am i n e al l o f t he ci rcu m s t an ces s u rro u n d i n g t h e i n terro g at io n

, but

t h e u l t i m a t e i n q u i ry i s s i m p l y wh et h er t h ere was a fo rm al arres t o r

res t rai n t o n freed o m o f m o v em en t o f t he d eg ree as s oci at ed wi t h a fo rm al

arres t

. Th e t es t fo r d et erm i n i n g wh et h e r a p e r so n i s “ i n cu s t o d y ” at a

t raffi c s to p i s i f a reas on ab l e pers o n i n t h e s u s pect ’ s po s it i on wo u l d h av e

t h o u g h t t h e d et en t io n wo u l d n o t b e t em p o rary

. Th e is s ue o f wh et h er o ne

i s i n cu s t o d y fo r Mi r a n d

a p u rp o s es is a m i x ed q u es t i o n of l aw an d fact

,

an d we wi l l n o t d i s t u rb t h e tri al co u rt ’ s det erm i n at io n u n l es s i t i s cl earl y

erro n eo us

. 1 5

Here, Sm i t h p o i n ts t o th e f a c t t h at h e was seat ed i n th e b ack s eat o f a p o l i ce

cru i s er, w h i ch h e arg u es i s t an t am o u n t t o bei n g fo rm al l y arres ted

. Bu t th i s o v erl o ok s

t h e ev i d en ce th at h e en t ered t h e cru i s er vo l u n t ari ly t o av o i d t h e rai n

, was free t o l eav e

t h e veh i cl e an d di d l eav e t o u ri n at e an d s m o k e, an d w as nev er h an d cu ffed or t o l d h e

was u n der arres t

. Un d er t h es e ci rcu m s t an ces

, t h e reco rd s up p o rt s a fi n d i n g t h at Sm i th

1 5 (Fo o t n o t es an d p u nct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) P a r k e r v. S ta t e

, 3 0 7 Ga. Ap p

. 6 1

, 6 5

(3 ) (7 04 SE2 d 4 38 ) (2 0 1 0 ).

10w a s n o t “ i n cu s t od y ” t o t h e ex t en t t h at a Mi r a n d a warn i n g w as req u i red b e f o r e

o ffi cers s p o k e wi th Sm i t h t o as cert ai n t he s i t u at i o n. 1 6

Fu rt her, wi t h res p ect t o t h e b reat h tes t

, “ becau s e a d efen d a n t ’s F ift h

Am en d m en t ri g h t ag ai n s t sel f-i ncri m i n at i o n i s no t i m pl i cat ed b y a St at e-ad m i n i s tered

b reat h t es t

, th e ab s e n c e of Mi r a n d a warn i n g s d oes n o t req u i re s u p p res s i o n o f [a

de f e nda nt’ s] c onse nt t o t h e b reat h tes t u n d er fed eral [Co ns t i t u ti o n al ] l aw.” 1 7 L ike w ise

,

“ n ei t h er t h e G eo rg i a ri gh t ag ai n s t co m p el l ed sel f-i n cri m i n at i o n

, th e Geo rg i a ri g h t to

d u e p ro ces s

, n or a Geo rg i a st at u t e pro h i b i t in g co m p el l ed sel f-i n cri m i n at i o n req u i res

l aw en fo rcem en t t o p ro v i d e s i m i l ar warn i n g s to p ers o ns arr e s t e d f o r DUI b efo re

as k i n g t h em t o s ub m i t t o a b r e at h t es t .” 1 8 An d t h e reco rd s u p p ort s a fi n d i n g t h at

1 6 See i d

. (“ It i s wel l es tab l i s h ed t h at Mi r a n d a warn i n g s are n o t req u i red wh i l e

an i n v es t ig at i n g o ffi cer co n d uct s p rel i m i n ary q u es t i o n i ng o r fi el d s o b ri et y t es t s

, b ut

ap p ly o n l y aft er a DUI s u s p ect i s arres t ed .”) (p u n ct u at i o n om i t t ed ). See al s o S t a t e v.

Pa s to r i n i

, 2 2 2 Ga. Ap p

. 3 1 6

, 3 1 7 (1 ) (4 7 4 SE2 d 1 2 2) (1 99 6 ) ( “ [ R ]o a d s i d e

q u es ti o n i n g d u ri n g t h e i n v es t i g at i o n o f a ro u t i n e t raffi c in ci den t g en eral l y d o es n ot

co n st i t u t e a cu s t o d i al s i tu at i o n .”) (ci t at io n o m i t t ed ), o verru l ed o n o t h er g ro u n d s by

S t a t e v. Tu r n q u es t , 3 0 5 Ga. 7 5 8 , 7 7 5 n .1 5 (8 2 7 SE2 d 8 6 5 ) (2 0 19 ).

1 7 (Pu n ct u at i o n om it t ed .) Fo f a n a h v. S t a te

, 3 5 1 Ga. Ap p

. 63 2

, 6 3 4 (1 ) (8 3 2

SE2 d 4 4 9) (2 0 1 9).

1 8 Tu r n q u es t

, 3 0 5 Ga. at 7 5 8

.

11Sm it h ’ s s u b s eq u en t b l o od t es t was p ro p erl y an d vo l u n t ari l y ad m i n i s t ered

.

Acco rd in g ly , t h i s en u m erat i o n i s wi t h o u t m eri t

.

3

. Sm i t h n ex t arg ues th at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y al l o w i n g t h e St at e t o i m p each

h i m w i t h s t at em en t s he m ad e t o a m a g i s t rat e d u ri ng h is b on d h eari n g on t h i s cas e

b e c a u s e h e was n ot M

i r an d i z ed wh en s p eak i n g t o th e m ag i s t rat e. Pri o r to t ri al

, t h e

St at e an d Sm i t h ag reed t h at t h e St at e wo u l d n o t i n t ro du ce t h o s e st at em en ts du ri n g t h e

St at e’ s cas e-i n -ch i ef, b u t wh en Sm i t h t es t i fi ed an d m i n i m i zed hi s al co h o l u s e at t h e

rel ev an t t i m e, t h e St at e s o ug h t t o i m p each h i m wi t h co nt rary s t at em en t s h e m ad e t o

t h e m ag i st rat e. Fo ll o wi n g a Ja cks o n -Den n o 1 9 heari n g o ut s i d e t h e pres en ce o f t h e ju ry

,

t h e t ri al co u rt al l o wed t h e St at e t o u s e t h e s t a t e m e n t s t o i m p each Sm i t h

, g i v i n g t h e

ju ry an i n s tru ct i o n ab o u t t h e p erm i s s ib l e co n s id erat i o n o f t h e i m p each m en t

ev i d en ce. 2 0 Sm i t h n o w co nt en d s t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y d o in g s o.

1 9 3 7 8 U. S. 3 6 8 (8 4 SCt 1 7 7 4 , 1 2 LE2 d 9 08 ) (1 9 6 4 ).

2 0 In h i s ap p el l at e b ri ef, Sm i t h m ak es a p as s i n g referen ce t o an arg u m en t t h at

t h e St at e’ s ag reem en t n o t t o u se t h e b o n d h eari n g st at em en t s im pact ed hi s d eci s i o n

t o tes t i fy

, b ut h e d o es n ot el ab o rat e wi t h au t h o ri t y o r ex p l ai n h o w, a s i d e fro m

i m p each m en t

, h i s d eci s i o n t o tes t i fy h arm ed h i m

. He ex p l ai ned t o t h e ju ry t h at h e

el ect ed to t es t i fy b ecau s e “ I j u s t wan ted t o t el l m y s id e of t h e s t o r y.

. . . [T] h i s h as

b een go i n g o n

. . . s i n ce 2 0 1 5 [,] an d I h av en ’ t b een ab l e t o t el l an y b o d y wh at

h ap pen ed

. . . . I d o n’ t w an t i t t o s o u n d l i k e i t ’ s ju s t m e,

. . . b ecau s e t here’ s an o t h er

fam i l y in v ol v ed i n t h i s

, b u t I j u s t wan t ed t o t el l m y s id e o f th e s t o ry b ecau s e I’ v e

h eard t h ro ug h p eo p l e s ay in g t h i n g s t h at I ju s t d o n ’t w a n t t o sp eak ab ou t

, b u t

. . . I

12Th e ev i d en ce at i s s ue cam e d u ri n g Sm i t h ’ s b o n d h eari n g aft er h e was arres t ed

.

At th e o u t s et o f t h e h eari n g

, t h e m ag i s t rat e t o ld Sm it h

, “ k eep i n m i n d an y th i n g y o u

s ay can b e u s ed as ev i d en ce ag ai n st y o u ,” b ut no fo rm al Mi r a n d a warn i n g w as g i v en

.

W h en t h e m ag i s trat e as k ed ho w m u ch al co h ol h e had co n s u m ed

, Sm i t h eq u i v o cat ed

,

fi rs t s ay in g o n e o r t wo b eers an d t h en s ay i n g fo u r a t t h e m o s t

. Sm it h al s o t o l d t h e

m ag i s t rat e t h at he m

us t h av e m i s

ju d g ed di st an ce wh en h e t u rn ed l eft i nt o th e p at h o f

t h e o n co m i n g m o t o rcy cl is t

. At t ri al

, Sm i t h t es t i fi ed i n h i s d efen s e, an d aft er t h e t ri al

co u rt d et erm i n ed t h at th e s t at em en t s at i s s u e were m ad e v o l un t ari l y

, t h e St at e u s ed

t h e s t at em en t s h e m ad e t o th e m ag i s t rat e t o i m p each h is tri al t es t i m o ny th at (a) h e

n ev er s aw t h e m o t o rcy cl i s t

, an d (b ) h e h ad o n ly co n s u m ed t wo b eers

.

P r e t e rm i t t i n g wh et h er t h e s t at em en t s at is s u e aro s e fro m a cu s t o d i a l

i n t erro g at i o n fo r p u rp o s es o f Mi r a n d a , t h i s Co u rt h as h el d th at “ ev en i f a s t at em en t

can n ot b e ad m it t ed in ord er t o es t ab l i s h g u il t b ecau s e it v io lat es t h e p ro p h y l act i c ru l e

en u nci at ed i n Mi r a n d

a

, i t i s p o s s i b l e t o a d m i t s u ch a s t at em en t fo r p u rp o s es o f

wan ted to b e ab l e t o g i v e an acco u nt o f wh at h ap p en ed [,] an d I ju s t wan t ed t o s p eak

fo r o n ce.” Sm i t h was ab le to p ro v i d e a fav o rab l e acco u n t o f t h e e v e n t s t o t h e ju ry

,

ex p la i n h i s cl ear-h ead ed n es s o n t h e m o rn i ng of t h e co l l i s i o n

, m i n i m i ze h i s

co n su m p t i o n of al co h o l, an d ex p res s h i s rem o rs e at th e acc i d e n t a l l o s s o f l i fe.

Acco rd in g ly

, t h is pas s i n g referen ce t o an y i m p act o n h i s deci s i on t o t es t i fy p res en t s

n o b as is fo r rev ers al

.

13i m

p each m en t ,” i f t h e s t at em en t was m ad e vo l u n t ari l y

. 2 1 T h i s req ui res a d et erm i n at i o n

wh et h er Sm i t h m ad e t h e s t at em en t s wi th o u t “ t h e s li g h tes t h o pe o f b en efi t o r rem o tes t

fear o f i n

ju ry .” 2 2 Th i s i s in t erp ret ed “ n o t i n t h e c o l l o q u i al s en s e, b u t as i t i s

u n d ers t o o d i n th e co n t ex t wi t h i n t h e s t at ut e

. . . [,i .e., referri n g ] to p ro m i s es rel at ed

t o red uced cri m i n al p u n i s hm en t

— a s h o rt er s en ten ce, l es ser ch arg es

, o r n o ch arg es

at al l .” 2 3

Bas ed on a rev i ew o f an au d i o reco rd i ng o f th e b o n d h eari n g, it i s p l ai n t h at t h e

m ag i s t rat e d i d no t m a k e an y t h reat o r p ro m i s e t o Sm i th wh en s h e en g ag ed i n t h e

co l l o q u y wi t h Sm i t h ab o u t t h e ci rcu m s t an ces o f h is arres t. Sh e i n fo rm al ly ad v i s ed

2 1 Ba b b i t t v. St a t e

, 3 3 7 Ga. Ap p

. 55 3

, 5 5 4 (1 ) (a) (7 89 SE2 d 2 0 5 ) (2 0 1 6 ). See

al s o Li n a r es v. S ta t e

, 2 6 6 Ga. 8 1 2

, 8 1 3 (2 ) (4 7 1 S E 2 d 2 0 8 ) (1 9 9 6) (“ Al t h o u g h a

s t at em en t o b t ai n ed i n v i o lat i o n o f Mi r a n d a m ay n o t b e u s ed i n t h e p ro s ecu t i o n ’ s

cas e-i n -ch i ef, i t m ay b e u s ed t o i m peach t h e d efen d an t ’ s cred i b il i t y i f i t s

t ru s t wo rt h in es s m eet s l eg al s t an d ard s

. Th i s t es t m ean s t h at a co urt m u s t fi n d t h at t h e

s t at em en t i s v ol un t ary u n d er t rad i t i o n al d u e p ro ces s an al y s i s .”) (fo o t n o t e o m i t t ed ).

Co m p are S t a t e v. Or r

, 3 0 5 G a. 7 2 9

, 7 3 3 n

. 2 (8 2 7 SE2 d 8 9 2 ) (2 0 1 9 ) (“ [D] u e p ro ces s

u n d er th e Fo urt een t h Am en d m en t p ro h i bi t s t h e g o v ern m en t fro m u s i n g

, fo r

i m p e a c h m en t pu rp o s es

, ev i d en ce t h at t h e d efen dan t ex erci s ed hi s ri gh t t o rem ai n

s i len t aft er h e was arres t ed an d ad v i s ed o f h i s ri gh t t o rem ai n s i l en t p urs u an t to

Mi r an d a .”).

2 2 OCGA § 2 4 -8 -8 2 4

. See Ba b b i t t

, 3 3 7 Ga. Ap p . at 5 5 5 (1 ) (a).

2 3 (Pu n ct u at i o n o m i tt ed .) Da ws o n v. St a t e

,

_ _ G a

.

_ _ ,

_ _ (3 ) (Cas e No

. S2 0 A0 21 7

, d eci d ed M ay

4

, 2 0 20 ).

14Sm it h t h at h i s s t at em en t s co u l d b e u s ed as ev i den ce ag ai n s t h i m

, an d s h e g av e n o

i n d i cat i o n t h at an y ad m i s s i on s wo u l d b ear o n h e r d e c i s i on t o g ran t o r d en y b o n d.

Un d er t h e t o t a l i ty o f t h es e ci rcu m s t an ces

, t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t err b y fi n d i n g t h at

Sm it h ’ s s t at em en t s at t h e bo n d h eari n g were m ad e v o l u n t ari ly

. Acco rd i n g l y

, t h e t ri al

co u rt d i d n o t ab u s e i t s d i s cret i o n b y al l owi n g t h e St at e to i m p each Sm i t h ’ s t ri al

t es t i m o ny wi t h h i s p ri o r i n co n s i s t en t s t at em en t s fro m t h e b o n d h eari n g

.

4

. Las t, Sm i t h co n ten d s t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y fai l i ng t o g i v e h i s req u es t ed

ju ry i n s t ru ct i on o n p ro x i m at e cau s e, s p eci fi cal l y :

In p ro s ecu ti o n s fo r v eh i cu l ar ho m i ci d e, t h e St at e m u s t p ro v e t h at th e

d efen d an t ’ s co n d u ct o f d ri v i n g u n d er t h e i n fl u en ce o f al co ho l t o was th e

“ l eg al ” o r “ p ro x i m at e” cau s e as wel l as t h e cau s e i n fact

, o f t h e d e a th

.

An d al t ho u g h c o n t r i bu t o ry n eg l i g en ce, as s u ch

, i s n o t a d efen s e i n a

v eh i cu l ar h om i ci d e cas e, t h e co n d u ct o f t h e d eced en t wh et h er n eg l i g en t

o r n o t

, i s m at eri al t o t h e ex t en t t h at i t b ears u p o n th e q u es t io n o f wh et h er

u n d er al l t h e ci rcu m s t an ces o f t h e cas e t h e d efen d an t was n eg l i g en t

, o r,

i f n eg l i g en t

, wh et her t h e d eced en t ’ s n eg l i g en ce was th e s ol e p ro x i m at e

cau s e o f t h e i n

ju r y, o r w h e t h er t h e i n

ju ry o r d eat h res ul t ed fro m an

u n av o i d ab l e acci d en t.

15W e rev i ew ju ry i n s tru ct i o n s “ as a wh o l e i n d et erm i n i n g w h e t h er t h e ch arg es

co n tai n ed erro r. An d i t i s n o t rev ers i b l e erro r t o fai l t o ch arg e i n t h e ex act l an g u ag e

req u es t ed wh en t h e ch arg e g i v en ad eq u at el y co v ers t h e co rrect l eg al p ri n ci p l es .” 2 4

Here, t h e t ri al co u rt i n s t ru ct ed t h e ju ry as fo l l o w s , i n rel ev an t p art :

A p ers o n co m

m i t s t h e offen s e o f ho m i ci d e by v eh i cl e in t h e fi rs t d eg ree

wh en wi t h o u t m al ice afo ret h o u g h t t h at p ers o n cau s es t he d eat h o f

an o t her pers o n wh i l e t h ere i s an al co h o l co n cen t rat io n o f 0 .0 8 g ram s o r

m o re i n t h e p ers o n ’ s b l o o d at an y t i m e wi t h i n th ree h o u rs aft er s u ch

d ri v in g en d ed

. Pro x i m at e cau s e ex i s t s wh en th e d efen d an t ’ s act pl ay ed

a s u bs t an ti al p art i n b ri n g i n g ab o u t or act u al l y cau s i n g t h e vi ct i m ’ s

d eat h, an d t h e d eat h w as ei t h er a d i rect res ul t o r a reas o n ab l y p ro b ab l e

co n s eq u en ce o f th e act

. If y o u fi n d b a s ed o n al l th e fact s an d

ci rcu m s t an ces o f t h i s cas e t h at t h e d efen d an t ’ s co n d u ct was a s u b s tan t i al

fact o r i n cau s i ng t h e v i ct i m ’ s deat h

, t h en an y n eg l i gen ce o n t h e p art o f

t h e d eced en t wo u l d b e i rrel ev an t

.

Th i s was a co rrect st at em en t o f t h e l aw an d ad eq u at el y reci ted t h e p ri n ci p l e o f

p ro x im at e cau s e, ev en as i t rel at es t o t h e co n d u ct of t h e d e c e d e n t

. A s n o t ed b y t h e

t ri al co u rt

, a n earl y i d en t i cal ch arg e was d eem ed ad eq u at e i n Ha r t z ler v. S ta t e

, 2 5 an d

2 4 (Fo ot no t es an d pu n ct uat i o n o m it t ed .) Jo h n s o n v. S t a te

, 3 4 1 Ga. Ap p

. 4 2 5,

4 3 1 (2 ) (8 0 1 SE2 d 2 94 ) (2 0 1 7 ).

2 5 3 3 2 Ga. Ap p . 6 7 4, 6 80 (3 ) (7 7 4 SE2 d 7 3 8 ) (2 0 1 5).

16t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s ch arg e i n t h i s cas e, as a wh o l e, p ro perl y en co m p as s ed t h e co n cep t o f

cau s at i o n wi th res p ect t o v eh icu l ar m an s lau g h ter. “ [A] s l o n g as t h e d e f en d an t ’ s

n eg li g en ce p ro x i m at el y cau sed t h e in ju ry o f an o th er, th e cri m e has b een co m m i t t ed

.

. . . Un l i k e t h e ci v i l co n t ex t

, i n t h e cri m i n al co n t ex t i t s i m p ly i s no t rel ev an t t h at t h e

v i ct i m was n eg l ig en t u n l es s th e d efen d an t ’ s co nd u ct di d n o t s u b s t an t i al l y co n t ri b u t e

t o t h e cau s e o f t h e i n

ju ry .” 2 6 Acco rd in g l y

, t h i s en um erat i o n pres en t s no b as i s fo r

rev ers al

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . McFa d

d en , C. J., a nd

Ho d g es , J., co n cu r

.

2 6 (Pu n ct u at i o n an d em

p has i s o m it t ed .) Co r b et t v. S t a t e

, 2 77 Ga. Ap p. 7 1 5

, 7 1 8

(1 ) (b ) (6 2 7 SE2 d 3 6 5) (2 00 6 ).

17