FOURTH D I VI SI ON

DI L LA RD, P. J.

, M ERCI ER and COLVI N, 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.

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

.

M ay 17, 2021



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A2 1 A0 52 4 . W E BB v . THE STATE.

D I LLA R D , Pres i d i n g J u d g e.

Fo l l owi n g tri al

, a ju ry co n v i ct ed St ep h en W eb b o f d ri v i n g u nd er t h e i n fl u en ce

o f al co h o l wi t h an ex ces s iv e b l o o d -al co h o l co n cen t rat i on (DUI per s e). On a p p e al

,

W eb b ch al l en g es t h e su f

f ic ie n cy o f th e ev i d en ce su p po rt i n g h i s co nv i ct i o n an d arg u es

t h at t h e tri al co u rt erred in ad m i t t i n g h i s p ri o r D U I co n v i ct i o n i n t o ev i d en ce. Fo r t h e

reas on s n o t ed i n

fr a , we affi rm

.

Vi ewed i n th e li g h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o th e ju ry ’ s v erd i ct

, 1 t h e reco rd s ho ws t h at

i n th e earl y ev en i n g o f Au g u s t 2 6

, 2 0 1 5

, a To wn s Co un t y Sh eri ff’ s d ep u t y recei v ed

a d i s p at ch d i rect in g h i m t o res p o n d t o a s i n g l e-v eh i cl e acci den t o n St at e Ro ut e 2

, n ear

M aced o n i a. W hen t he d ep u t y arri v ed o n th e s cen e, he o b s erv ed a t ru ck t h at ap p eared

1 S ee, e.g

. , Li b ri v. S t a t e , 3 4 6 Ga. Ap p . 4 2 0 , 4 2 1 (8 1 6 SE2 d 4 1 7 ) (2 0 1 8 ).t o h av e cro s s ed t h e cen t er li n e an d co l l i d ed wi t h t h e g u ard rai l o n t h e op p os i t e s i d e o f

t h e ro ad

. Im m e d i a t el y , t h e d ep u t y an d an em erg en cy m ed i cal t ech n i ci an (wh o h ad

al read y arri v ed o n t h e s cen e) as s i s t ed t h e dri v er, i d en t i fi ed as W eb b

, i n g et t i n g o u t o f

h i s d am ag ed v eh i cl e. W eb b t o l d t h e EM T t h at h e di d no t need m ed i cal t reat m en t an d

i n fo rm ed t h e d e p u t y t h a t t h e acci den t was a res u l t o f hi m b l ack i n g o u t fro m a

co u gh i n g fi t cau s ed b y ch ro n i c o b s t ru ct i v e pu l m o nary d i s e a s e ( “ COPD”). Bu t t h i s

ex p lan at i o n n o t wi t h st an d in g , t h e d ep u t y s m el l ed an al co h o l i c

- bev erag e o d o r an d

s u s p ect ed t h at W eb b was im p ai red

. Co n s eq u en t l y , h e deci d ed t o h av e W eb b p erfo rm

s ev eral fi el d -s o b ri et y

t es t s

.

Pri o r t o d oi n g s o , t h e d ep u t y as k ed W eb b i f h e h ad i n g es t ed an y m ed i cat i on s

t h at d ay , an d W eb b res p o n d ed t h at he ha d ta k e n p r e scri b ed Al p razo l am

. N ev ert h el es s ,

t h e dep u t y p ro ceed ed i n co n d uct i n g f i el d-s o b ri et y t es t s an d fi rs t ad m i n is t ered t h e

h o ri zo n t al g aze ny s tag m

u s (HGN) t es t

, wh i ch i n d i cat ed t h at W eb b w as i m pai red

. He

t h en h ad W eb b p erfo rm t h e wal k -an d -t u rn an d o n e-l eg s t an d t es t s , b ot h o f wh i ch

W eb b h ad d i ffi cu l t y co m p l et i n g

. Th e d ep u ty t h en as k ed W eb b t o t ak e a p o rt ab l e

al co -s en s o r b reat h tes t. H e ag reed to d o so , an d h i s breat h t es ted p o s i t iv e f o r t h e

p res en ce o f al co h o l

. At t h i s po i n t, th e d ep u t y su s pect ed t h at W eb b was u n d e r t h e

i n fl u en ce o f al co ho l an d p l a c e d h i m u n d er arres t

. Th e d ep u t y th en read W eb b o u r

2s t at e’ s i m

p l i ed -co n sen t n o t i ce fo r d ri v ers o ver t h e ag e o f 2 1 t wo s ep arat e t i m es an d

as k ed i f h e w o u l d s u b m i t t o a St at e-ad m i n i st ered b l o od tes t

. W eb b ag reed

, aft er wh i ch

t h e EM T co n du ct ed a b l o o d -d raw an d s eal ed t h e s am p l es fo r t es t i n g

. Ul t i m at el y , t h e

res u l ts o f th at t es t in g i n d i cat e d a b l o o d-al co h o l co n t en t o f 0 .0 8 8 g ram s p er 1 0 0

m i l l il i t ers , wi t h a m arg i n of erro r o f p l u s o r m i nu s 0 .0 0 5 g ram s p er 1 0 0 m il l i l i t ers

.

Th e St at e ch arg ed W eb b

, v i a accu s at i o n, wi t h o n e co u n t each o f dri v i n g u n d er

t h e i n fl u en ce o f al co h o l w it h an ex ces s iv e b l o o d -al co h o l co n cen t rat io n , d ri vi n g u n d er

t h e co m bi n ed in fl u en ce o f al co ho l an d A lp razo l am to t h e ex t en t i t was les s safe t o d o

s o , an d fai lu re t o m ai n t ai n l an e. Su b s eq u en t l y , t h e St at e fi l e d n o t i c e o f i t s i n t en t to

p res en t ev i d en ce o f W eb b ’ s p ri o r b ad act s

— s p eci f i c a l l y a DUI p er s e g u i l t y p l ea

b as ed o n an i n ci d en t t h at occu rred ab o u t t w o w e ek s b efo re h i s Au g u s t 2 6

, 2 0 1 5

arres t

. An d ap pro x i m at el y a week b efo re t ri al

, t h e co u rt h el d a h eari n g o n t h e i s s ue,

d u ri n g wh i ch t h e St at e arg u ed t h at th e ev i d en ce o f W eb b ’ s p ri o r DUI co n v i ct i o n was

ad m i s s i b l e u n der Ru l e 4 0 4 2 t o s h o w h i s i n t en t b u t t h at wei g h i n g t h e ev i d en ce’ s

2 S ee OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 0 4 (b ) (“ Ev id en ce o f o t h er cri m es , wro n g s , o r act s s h al l

n o t b e ad m i s s i b l e to p ro v e th e ch aract er o f a pers o n i n o rd er t o s ho w act i o n i n

co n fo rm i t y t h erewi t h

. It m ay , h o wev er, b e ad m i s s ib l e fo r o t h er p u rp o s es , i n cl u d i n g, b u t n o t l i m i t ed t o, p ro o f o f m o t iv e, o p p o rt u n i t y , i n t en t

, prep arat io n , p l an , k no wl ed ge, i d en t i t y , o r ab s en ce o f m i st ak e o r acci d en t . . . .”).

3p ro b at i v e v al ue ag ai n s t i t s p reju d i ci al effect u n d er Ru l e 4 0 3 3 co ul d b e d eferred u n t i l

t h e p o i nt d u ri n g t ri a l w h e n t h e St at e deci d ed w h et h er t o p res en t i t

. Th en , at t h e

co n cl u s i o n o f t h e h eari n g, t he co u rt s t at ed o n t h e reco rd th at t h e p ri o r co n vi ct i o n was

ad m i s s i b l e t o s h o w i n t en t.

Th e ca s e p r o c e e d ed t o tri al

, d u ri ng wh i ch t h e St at e pres en t ed t h e fo reg o i n g

ev i d en ce, as wel l as t es t i m o n y fro m th e GBI fo ren s i c to x i co l og i s t wh o tes t ed W eb b ’ s

b l o o d -s am

p l e an d d et erm in ed t h at i t h ad a b l o o d -al co h ol co n t en t o f 0 .0 8 8 g ram s p er

1 0 0 m il l i l i t ers , wi t h a m arg i n o f e r r o r of p lu s o r m i n us 0 .0 0 5 gram s p er 1 0 0

m i l l il i t ers

. Fo ll o wi n g t h at wi t n es s , t h e St at e i n fo rm ed t h e t ri al c o u r t t h a t i t h ad

d eci d ed t o p res en t ev id en ce co n cern i n g W eb b ’ s p ri o r D UI co n v i ct i o n an d

, t h u s , t h e

co u rt n eed ed to co n d u ct a h eari n g wei g h i ng th e p ro b at iv e v al u e o f t h e ev i d en ce

ag ai n s t i t s p reju d i ci al effect

. Bo t h p art i es t h en arg u ed t h o s e i s s u e s , a f t e r w h i ch t h e

t r i a l co urt ru l ed t h at t h e p ri o r co n v i ct i on was ad m i s s i bl e. T h e St at e t h en cal l ed a

W h i t e Co u n ty Sh eri ff’ s d ep u t y as a wi tn es s , wh o t es t i fi ed reg ard in g h is t raffi c s t o p

o f W eb b ’s v eh i cl e, t he ev i d en ce o f W eb b ’ s i m p ai rm en t

, an d t he u l ti m at e arres t o f

3 S ee OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 0 3 (“ Rel ev an t ev i d en ce m ay b e ex cl u ded i f i t s pro b at i v e

v al u e i s 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, co nfu s i o n o f t h e i s su es , or m i s l ead i n g t h e ju ry or b y co n si d erat i on s o f u n du e d el ay , was te of t i m e, o r

n eed les s p res en t at i o n o f cu m u lat i v e ev i d en ce.”).

4W eb b fo r d ri v i n g u n d er th e i n fl u en ce o f al co h o l

. An d d u ri n g t h e d ep u ty ’ s t es t i m o n y ,

t h e St at e i n t ro d u ced W eb b ’ s p ri o r gu i l t y p l ea an d co n v i ct i o n on t h e ch arg e o f DUI p er

s e.

Aft er th e St at e r e s t ed

, W eb b m o v ed fo r a d i rect ed verd i ct

, an d th e tri al co u rt

g ran t ed h i s m o ti o n as t o t h e DUI l es s s afe co u n t b u t d en ied i t as t o th e DUI per s e an d

f ai l u re-t o -m ai nt ai n -l an e co u nt s. At t h e co n cl u s i o n o f t h e t ri al

, t h e ju ry c o n v i c t e d

W eb b o n t h e D UI per s e co u n t b u t acq u i t t ed h i m o n t h e fai l u re t o m ai n t ai n l an e co u n t

.

Th ereaft er, W eb b fi led a m o t i on fo r n ew t ri al

, wh i ch t h e t ri al co u rt d en i ed s u b s eq u en t

t o a h eari n g o n t h e m at t er. Th is ap p eal fo l l o ws

.

1

. In h i s fi rs t en u m erat i o n o f erro r, W eb b co n t en d s t h at t h e ev i den ce s up p o r t i n g

h i s DUI p er se co n v i ct i o n w as i n s u ffi ci en t an d

, ad d it i on al l y , t h at t h e ju ry ’ s g ui l t y

v erd i ct was s t ro ng l y ag ai ns t th e wei g h t o f t h e ev i d en ce. W e d i s ag ree.

W h en a cri m i n a l c o n v i ct i o n i s ap p eal ed

, t h e ev i d en ce m u s t b e v i ewed i n t h e

l i gh t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t he v erd i ct

, an d t h e ap p el l an t n o l on g er en jo y s a p res u m

p t i o n

o f i n n o cen ce. 4 An d i n ev al u at in g t h e s u ffi ci en cy o f t he ev i d en ce, we “ d o n o t wei g h

t h e ev i d en ce o r d et erm i n e wi t n es s cred i b il i t y , b u t on l y d et erm i n e wh et h er a rat i o n al

4 S ee En g l i sh v. S t a te , 3 0 1 Ga. Ap p . 8 4 2 , 8 4 2 (6 8 9 SE2 d 1 3 0) (2 0 1 0 ) (n o t i n g

t h at fo ll o wi n g co n v i ct i o n , an ap p el l an t n o l o ng er en j o y s a p res u m

p t i on o f i n n o cen ce).

5t ri er of fact co u l d hav e fo u n d t h e d efen d an t g u i l t y o f t h e ch arg ed o ffen s es b ey o n d a

reas on ab l e d o u b t .” 5 Th e ju ry ’ s v erd i ct wi ll b e up h el d, t h en , s o l o ng as t h ere i s “ s o m e

co m p et en t ev i d en ce, ev en th o u g h co n t rad i ct ed

, to s u p p o rt e a c h f a c t ne c e ssa

r y to m ak e

o u t t h e St at e’ s cas e.” 6 Beari n g t h es e g u i di n g p ri n ci pl es i n m i nd , we t urn t o W eb b ’ s

ch al l en g e t o t h e s u ffi ci en cy o f t h e ev i den ce.

Un d er OCGA § 4 0 -6 -3 9 1 ( a ) ( 5 ), “ [a] pers o n s hal l n o t d ri ve or b e i n act u al

p h y s i cal co n t ro l of an y m o v i n g v eh i cl e w h i l e

. . . [t ] h e p ers o n’ s al co h o l co n cen t rat i o n

i s 0 .0 8 g ram s o r m o re at an y t i m e wi t h i n t h r e e h o u r s a f t er su ch d ri v i n g o r b ei n g in

act u al p h y s i cal co n tro l fro m al co h o l co n s u m ed befo re s u ch d ri v in g or b ei ng i n act u al

p h y s i cal co n t ro l en d ed [.] ” An d h ere, t h e ev i d en ce s h ows t h at W eb b was i n v o l v ed in

a o n e-v eh i cl e acci den t

, i n wh i ch h e v eered acro s s t he ro ad a n d c o l l i d ed wi th a

g u ard rai l

. In ad d i t i o n , t h e arres t i n g dep u t y t es t i fi ed t h at h e h e l p e d p u l l W eb b

— t h e

o n l y o ccu p an t

—fro m h i s wreck ed t ru ck

, th at he sm el l ed an al co h o l i c-b ev erag e o d o r

5 Jo n es v. S t a t e , 3 1 8 Ga. A p p

. 2 6

, 2 9 (1 ) (7 3 3 SE2 d 7 2 ) (2 0 1 2 ) (p u n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed ); s ee a l

s o Ja cks on v. Vi r

g i n i a , 4 43 U.S. 3 0 7

, 3 1 9 (III) (B) (9 9 SCt 2 7 8 1

, 6 1

LE2 d 5 60 ) (1 9 7 9) (n o t in g t h e rel ev an t q u es t i o n i s , aft er v i ewi n g t h e ev i d en ce i n t h e l i gh t m os t fav o rab l e t o t h e p ro s ecu t i o n , co u l d an y rat i o n al j u r y f o u n d t h e es s en t i al

el em en t s o f t h e cri m e b ey o n d a reas o nab l e d o u b t ).

6 Mi l l er v. S t at e , 2 7 3 G a. 8 3 1

, 8 3 2 (5 4 6 S E 2 d 5 2 4 ) (2 0 0 1) (p u n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed ); a cco rd W

es t b r o o ks v. S t a t e , 3 0 9 Ga. A pp

. 3 9 8

, 3 9 9 -4 0 0 (1 ) (7 1 0 SE2 d 5 9 4 ) (2 0 1 1).

6em an at i n g fro m W eb b

, t h at m o s t o f t h e fi el d -s o b ri et y t es t s i n d icat ed Web b was

i m p ai red

, an d t h at t h e EM T drew W eb b ’ s b l o o d fo r t es t i n g at t h e s cen e. Fu rt h erm o re,

t h e GBI fo ren s ic t o x i co l og i s t t es t i fi ed t h at W eb b ’ s bl o o d h ad a bl o od -al co h ol co n t en t

o f 0

. 0 8 8 g ram s p er 10 0 m i l li l it ers , wi t h a m arg i n of erro r of p l u s o r m i n u s 0 .0 0 5

g ram s p er 1 0 0 m i ll i l i t ers

— p laci n g t h at co nt en t o v er t h e l eg al l i m i t o f 0 .0 8

.

W eb b no n et hel es s arg ues t h at h i s b l o o d sam pl e co u l d h av e ferm en t ed p ri or to

t es t i n g , w h i ch wo u l d ren d er t h e fo ren si c to x i co l o g is t’ s tes t i n accu rat e. Bu t in

re s p o n s e t o W eb b ’ s cro s s ex am i n at i o n, t h e t o x i co l o gi s t s p eci fi cal l y t es t i fi ed t h at

f e r m e n t at i o n o f a p ers on ’ s b l o o d was rare an d o nl y o ccu rs i f an o rg an i c s u b s t a n c e

c o n t am i n at es t h e b l o o d s am p l e. Su ffi ce i t to s ay , t h e ju ry was en ti t led t o cred i t t h e

ex p ert ’ s t es t i m on y o v er W eb b ’ s s p ecu l at io n t h at s uch an an o m al y o ccu rred wi t h h i s

b l o o d s am

p l e. 7 Gi v en t h es e ci rcu m s t an ces , t h e ev i d en ce was s u ffi c i e n t t o s u p p o rt

W eb b ’ s co nv i ct io n o n t h e ch arg e o f DUI p er s e. 8

7 S ee Hei d t v. S t a te

, 2 9 2 Ga. 3 4 3

, 3 4 5 (1 ) (7 3 6 SE2 d 3 8 4) (2 0 1 3) (n o t i n g t h at
i t i s th e ju ry ’ s ro l e t o res ol v e co n fl i ct in g ex p ert t es t i m o n y ); M i ch a el v. S t a t e , 3 3 5 Ga. Ap p

. 5 7 9

, 5 8 4 (1 ) (7 82 SE2 d 4 7 9 ) (2 0 1 6 ) (“ It i s t h e fu n ct i o n of t h e ju ry , rat h er t h an

t h i s Co u rt , t o wei g h t h e ev i d en ce, res o l v e co n fl i ct s i n t h e l ay an d ex p ert t es t i m o n y ,

an d d raw reas o n ab l e i nferen ces fro m t h e ev i den ce.”).

8 S ee Tu r ner v. S t a t e , 3 5 2 G a. Ap p

. 1 22

, 1 2 4 ( 2 ) (8 3 3 SE2 d 2 9 9 ) (2 0 1 9 ) (h o l d i n g t h at d efen d an t’ s b l oo d s am p l e, wh i ch s h o w ed a b l o o d al co h o l l ev el o f 0 .1 4 3,

was s u ffi ci en t t o s u p po rt d efen d an t’ s co n v i ct i o n o f DUI p er s e); Ca n el a s v. S t a t e , 3 4 5

7Ad d it i on al l y , al t h o ug h n o t s ep arat el y en u m erat ed fro m h i s co n t en t i o n t h at t h e

ev i d en ce was in su ffi ci en t t o s u p p o rt h i s co nv i ct io n , W eb b al so arg ues th at we s h o u ld

ex erci s e ou r d is cret i o n an d fi n d t h at t h e ju ry ’ s v erd ict w as ag ai n s t t h e wei g h t o f t h e

ev i d e n c e

. I n e s s en ce, W eb b i s req u es t i n g t h at t h i s Co u rt g ran t h i m a n ew t ri al o n

g en eral g ro u n d s . Bu t t h i s , we can n o t d o

.

It i s t ru e t h at

, u n d e r G e o rg i a l aw, “ [i ] n an y cas e w h en t h e v erd i ct o f a ju ry i s

fo u n d co n t rary t o ev id en ce an d t he p ri nci p l es o f ju s ti ce a n d e q u i t y , th e ju d g e

p res i di n g m ay g ran t a n ew t ri al b efo re an o t h er ju ry .” 9 An d th e p res i d i n g ju dg e “ m ay

ex erci s e a s o u n d d i s cret i o n i n g ran t i n g o r refu s i n g n ew t ri al s i n cas es w h ere t h e

v erd i ct m ay b e d eci ded l y an d s t ro n g l y ag ai n s t t h e wei g h t o f t h e ev id en ce ev en t h o u g h

t h ere m ay ap p ear t o b e s om e s l i g h t ev i den ce i n fav o r o f t h e fi n d i ng .” 1 0 Ev en s o ,

a m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al b as ed o n OCGA § 5 -5 -2 0

, i.e., t h at t he v erd i ct i s

co n t rary t o t h e ev i d en ce, ad d res s es i t s el f o n ly t o t h e d i s cret i o n o f th e

t ri al ju d g e. W h et h er t o g ran t a n ew t ri al b as ed o n OCGA § 5 -5 -2 1

, i.e.,

Ga. Ap p

. 4 9 7

, 5 0 1 (1 ) (c) (8 1 3 SE2 d 1 7 0 ) (2 0 1 8 ) (fi n d i n g t h at d efen d an t ’ s b l o o d t es t

,

w h i c h w a s t ak en an h ou r an d fi ft een m in u t es aft er h is acci d en t an d in d icat ed t h a t
d efen d an t h ad a b l o o d al co h o l co n cen t rat i o n o f 0 .1 5 3 g ram s p er m l was s u ffi ci en t to

s u p p ort h i s co n v i ct i o n o f DUI p er s e).

9 OCGA § 5 -5 -2 0

.

1 0 OCGA § 5 -5 -2 1

.

8t h at t h e v erd i ct i s s t ro n g l y ag ai n s t t h e ev i d en ce, i s o ne t h at i s s o l el y i n

t h e d i s cret i o n of t h e t ri al co u rt

, an d t h e ap pel l at e co urt s d o n o t h av e th e

s am e d i s cret io n t o o rd er n ew t ri al s

. 1 1

Co n s eq u en t l y , ev en wh en an ap p e l l a n t s eek s ap pel l at e rev i ew o f “ a t ri al co urt ’ s

r e f u s al t o g ran t a n ew t ri al o n t h e g en eral g ro un d s , t h i s Co u rt m u s t rev i ew t h e c a s e

u n d er t he s t an d a r d s et fo rt h i n Ja cks o n v. Vi r g in i a , s u p r a , t h at i s, i f t h e ev i d en ce

v i ewed i n t h e l i g h t m o s t f a v o rab l e t o th e p ro secu t i o n, s u p p ort s t h e v erd i ct o r

v erd i ct s

. ” 1 2 An d as ex p l ai n ed s u p r a , t h e ev i d en ce th e St at e p res e n t ed at t ri al

s u ffi ci en t l y

s u pp o rt ed t h e ju ry ’ s v erd i ct

. 1 3

2

. W eb b fu rt h er co n t en d s t h at t h e t ri al co urt erred i n ad m i t t i n g h i s p ri o r DUI

co n vi ct i o n i n t o ev i den ce. Ag ai n , we d i s ag ree.

OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 0 4 (b ) p ro v i d es :

1 1 Al l en v

. S t a te

, 2 9 6 Ga. 7 3 8

, 7 41 (2 ) (7 7 0 SE2 d 6 2 5) (2 0 1 5 ) (ci t at i o n s an d

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

1 2 Id

. (p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ); a cco r d W i l l i a ms v. S t a t e , 2 9 6 Ga. 5 73 , 5 7 4 (7 6 9

SE2 d 3 1 8) (2 0 1 5).

1 3 S e e A l l en , 2 9 6 Ga. at 7 4 1 -4 2 (2 ) (h o l d in g t h at b ecau s e th e ev i d en ce was

s u f f i c i e n t un d er Ja cks on t o s u pp o rt d efen d an t ’ s co n v i ct io n , ap p el l at e co urt d i d n ot
h av e t h e s am e d i s cret i o n as t ri al co urt t o o rd er a n ew t ri al u n d er OCGA § § 5 -5 -2 0 an d

5 -5 -2 1 ); Al l en v. S t at e , 3 4 5 Ga. Ap p . 5 9 9 , 6 0 3 (2 ) (8 1 4 SE2 d 7 4 0 ) (2 0 1 8 ) (s am e).

9Ev i d en ce o f ot h er cri m es , wro n g s, o r act s s h al l n o t b e ad m is s i b l e t o

p ro v e t h e ch aract e r 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

. It m ay , h o wev er, b e ad m i s s ib l e fo r o t h er p urp o s es , i n cl ud i n g , b u t n o t l im ite d to

, p ro o f of m o t i v e, o p p o rt u n i t y , i nt en t

, p rep arat i o n , p l an , k n o wl ed g e, i d en t i t y , o r ab s en ce o f m i st ak e o r acci den t

. . . . 1 4

An d t h e Su p rem e Co u rt o f Geo rg i a h as ad o p t ed a t h ree-p art tes t b y wh i ch w e ev al u at e

t h e ad m is s i b i l it y o f s o -cal l e d “ o t h er act s ” ev id en ce: “ (1 ) t he ev i d en ce m u s t b e

rel ev an t t o an i ss u e o t h er t han d efen d an t ’ s ch aract er; (2 ) t he p ro b at i v e v al u e m u s t n ot

b e su b s t an ti al l y o u twei g h ed by i t s u n d u e p reju d i ce; [an d ] (3 ) t h e g o v ern m en t m u s t

o ffer s u ffi ci en t p ro of s o t h at t h e ju ry co u l d fi n d t h at d efen dan t co m m i t t ed th e act .” 1 5

As t o t h e fi rs t fact o r, rel ev an t ev i d en ce is “ e v i d e n ce h av i n g an y ten d en cy to

m ak e t h e ex i s t en ce o f an y fac t t h a t i s of co n s eq u en ce t o t he det erm in at i o n o f t h e

act i on m o re pro bab l e o r l es s pro b ab l e t h an i t wo ul d b e wi t h o ut t he ev i d en ce.” 1 6 An d

as to t h e s eco n d fact o r, ev en i f Ru l e 4 0 4 (b ) ev i d en ce i s rel ev an t

, we m u st s t i l l d eci d e

wh et h er “ t he p ro b at i ve v al u e o f t h e o t h er act s ev i d en ce i s s u b s t an ti al l y o u t wei g h ed

1 4 S ee a l s o S ma r t v. St a t e , 2 9 9 Ga. 4 1 4

, 4 1 7 (2 ) (7 8 8 SE2 d 4 4 2 ) ( 2 0 1 6 ) (q u o ti n g OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 0 4 (b )).

1 5 Id

. (p un ct u at i on om i t t ed ) (q u o t in g Un i t ed St a t es v. El l i s o r , 5 2 2 F3 d 1 2 5 5,

1 2 6 7 (II) (A) (1 1t h Ci r. 2 0 0 8 )).

1 6 OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 0 1 ; a cco r d S ma r t , 2 9 9 Ga. at 4 1 8 (2 ) (a).

10b y i t s u n fai r p reju di ce, i .e., t h e ev i d en ce m u s t s at i s fy t h e req u i rem en t s o f Ru l e 4 0 3 .” 1 7

Im p o rt an t l y , a p pl i cat i o n o f t he Ru l e 4 0 3 b al an ci n g t es t i s “ a m at ter co m m i t t ed

p r i n c i p a l l y t o t h e d i s cret io n o f t he t ri al co urt s .” Bu t as we h av e prev i o u s l y

em ph as i zed , “ t h e ex cl u s i o n o f ev i d en ce u n d er Ru l e 4 0 3 i s an ex trao rd i nary rem ed y

wh i ch s h o u l d b e us ed on l y s p ari n g l y .” 1 8 In d eed

, t h i s Co u rt rev i ews t h e ad m i s s i o n o f

Ru l e 4 0 4 (b ) ev i d en ce “ fo r a cl ear ab u s e o f d is cret i o n ,” a d eferen t i al rev i ew req u i ri n g

u s t o m ak e “ a co m

m o n sen se as s es s m en t of al l t h e ci rcu m s t a n c e s s u rro u nd i n g t h e

ex t ri ns i c o ffen s e, i n cl u d i n g p ro s ecu t o ri al n eed

, o v e ral l s i m i l ari t y b et ween t h e

ex t ri ns i c act an d t he ch arg ed o ffen s e, as wel l as t em p o ral rem o t en es s.” 1 9

1 7 S ma rt , 2 9 9 Ga. at 4 1 8 (2 ) (b ) (p u n ct u at i on o m i t ted ); a cco r d S t a t e v. Jo n es , 2 9 7 Ga. 1 5 6

, 1 59 (2 ) (7 7 3 SE2 d 1 7 0 ) (2 0 15 ); see al s o OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 0 3 (“ Rel ev an t

ev i d en ce m ay be ex cl u d ed if i t s p ro bat i v e v al u e i s s u b s t an t ial l y o u t w e i g h ed b y t h e d an ger o f u n fai r preju d ice, co n fu s i o n o f t h e i s su es , o r m i s l ead i n g t h e ju ry o r by

co n si d erat io n s o f u n d u e d el ay , was t e o f t i m e, o r n eed l es s p res en tat i o n o f cu m u l at i v e

ev i d en ce.”); Ro n al d L

. Carl s o n & M i ch ael Sco t t Carl s o n , CARLSON ON

EVIDENCE 96 (5 t h ed

. 2 01 6 ) (“ Un d er Ru l e 4 0 3

, t h e t erm ‘ un fai r p reju d i ce’ s p eak s

t o t h e cap aci t y of s o m e co n ced ed l y rel ev an t ev i d en ce t o l u r e t h e f a ct fi n d er i n to
d ecl ari ng g u i l t o n a g ro u n d d i fferen t fro m p ro o f s p eci fi c t o t h e o ffen s e ch arg ed

. Th e

p reju d i ce referen ced i n Ru le 4 0 3 ad d res s e s p r eju d ice t o t h e in t eg ri t y o f t h e t ri al

p ro ces s , n o t p reju d i ce t o a p art i cu l ar p art y o r wi tn es s .” (fo o t n o t e o m i t t ed )).

1 8 S ma r t

, 2 9 9 Ga. at 4 1 8 (2 ) (b ) (p u n ct u at i on o m it t ed ); a cco r d Mo r r i s v. S t a t e , 3 4 0 Ga. Ap p . 2 9 5 , 3 0 6 (4 ) (7 97 SE2 d 2 0 7 ) (2 0 1 7).

1 9 Br a n n o n v. S t at e , 2 98 Ga. 6 0 1

, 6 0 6 (4 ) (7 8 3 SE2 d 6 4 2 ) (2 0 1 6 ) (p u n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed ); a cco r d Mo rr is

, 34 0 Ga. Ap p

. at 3 0 6 -0 7 (4 ); G r a h a m v. S t a t e , 3 3 7 Ga. Ap p.

11In t h i s m at ter, t he tri al co u rt ad m i t t e d W eb b ’ s p ri o r DUI p er s e co n v i ct i o n

b as ed o n t h e St at e’ s arg u m en t t h at i t co n s t i t u ted ev i d en ce o f i n t e n t

. An d as h e d id

b el o w, o n ap p eal

, W eb b ar g u es t h at t h e ev i d en ce was i n ad m i s s i b l e u n d er Ru l e 4 0 4

(b ) an d Ru l e 4 0 3. Bu t ou r Su p rem e Co u rt h as h el d t h at “ [b ] ecau se th e s am e s t at e o f

m i n d [i s ] req u ired fo r co m m i t t i n g t h e p ri o r act an d t h e ch arg ed cri m e[ ]

, i .e., t h e

g en eral i n t en t t o d ri v e wh i l e u n d er t h e i n fl u en ce o f al co h o l

, ev id en ce o f [a

d efen d an t ’ s] p ri o r co n v i ct i o n [ i s ] r e l ev an t u nd er Ru l e 4 0 4 (b ) t o sh o w [t h e

d efen d an t ’ s] i n t en t o n [t h e s u b ject ] o ccas i on .” 2 0

Ack n o wl ed g i n g t h i s preced en t i al h u rd l e, W eb b fo cu s es h i s co n t en t i on o n t h e

p ri o r DUI co n v i ct i o n b ei n g i n ad m i s s i bl e u n der Ru l e 4 0 3

. Sp eci fi cal l y , h e arg u es t h at

t h e t ri al co u rt fai l ed t o co n d u ct th e req u i red b al an ci n g tes t an d, i n an y ev en t

, t h e

p ro b at i v e v al u e o f t h e p ri o r co n v ict i o n was s u b s tan t i al l y o u twei g h ed b y i t s u n fai r

p reju d i ce. Bu t t h e fi rs t p art o f t h i s co n t en ti o n i s b el i ed b y th e reco rd

. In d eed

, at t h e

6 6 4

, 6 6 9 (2 ) (7 8 8 SE2 d 5 5 5 ) ( 2 0 1 6 ) ; s e e CARLSON, s up r a n o t e 1 7

, p

. 1 3 0 (“ Ev al uat i n g t h e b al an ce b et ween p ro b at i v i t y an d p reju d i ce u n d er Ru le 4 03 cal l s fo r

a c o m m o n s e n se as s es s m en t o f al l t h e ci rcu m s tan ces s u rro u n d i ng t h e o t h er act

, i n cl u d i n g [t h e] p ro p o n en t ’ s n eed fo r t h e [Ru l e 40 4 (b )] ev i den ce, t h e o v e r a l l

s i m i l ari t y b et ween t h e ex t ri n s i c ev i d en ce an d th e offen s e at is s u e, an d t h e t em p o ral

p ro x im it y o f t h e t wo .”).

2 0 S t at e v

. Jo n es , 2 9 7 Ga. 1 5 6

, 1 6 0 -6 1 (2 ) (7 7 3 SE2 d 1 7 0 ) (2 0 1 5 ); a cco r d

Mo n r o e v. S t at e , 3 4 0 Ga. Ap p

. 3 7 3 , 3 7 5 (2 ) (7 9 7 SE2 d 2 4 5 ) (2 0 17 ).

12p ret ri al h eari n g on t h e ad m i s s i b il i t y o f W ebb ’ s earl i er DUI co n v i ct i o n , t h e St at e n o t ed

t h at a b al an ci n g t es t u n der Ru l e 4 0 3 was req u i red b u t co u l d b e co n d u ct ed at t ri al ju s t

p ri o r t o th e St at e’ s p res en t at i o n o f t h e ev i d en ce. T h en , at t ri al

, b efo re t he St at e cal l ed

t h e W h i t e Co un t y Sh eri ff’ s dep u t y t o t es t i fy ab o u t t h e earl i er D UI, t h e co urt ex p l i ci t l y

s t at ed o n t h e reco rd t h at i t wo u l d h ear arg u m en t fro m t h e p art i es , u n d er Ru l e 4 0 3

, as

t o wh et h er t he p ro b at i v e v al ue o f t h e ev i d en ce was s ub s t an t i al l y o u twei gh ed b y i t s

u n fai r p reju d i ce. Th en , fo l l o wi n g t hat arg u m en t

, t h e t ri al co u rt ad m i t ted W eb b ’ s p ri o r

co n vi ct i o n

.

Nev ert h el es s , W eb b ap p aren t l y t ak es i ss u e wi th t h e tri al co u rt ’ s ad m i s s i o n o f

t h e fo reg o i n g ev id en ce b ecau s e it fai l ed t o ex p l ici t l y s t at e th at i t wei g h ed t h e

p ro b a t iv e v al u e o f t he co n v i ct i o n ag ai n s t i t s u n fai r p reju di ci al i m p act o r p ro v i d e

d et ai ls i n s u p p o rt of i t s ru l i n g

. B u t a l t h o u g h i n i t s ru l i n g “ t h e tri al co u rt d i d n ot

ex p li ci t l y m en t i on Ru l e 4 0 3

, ab s en t so m e ex p res s s h o wi ng t hat t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n ot

u n d ers t an d i t s o b l i gat i o n t o co n d u ct t h e b al an ci n g t es t

, we wi l l n o t read s u ch erro r

i n t o t h e t r i a l co urt ’ s ru l i ng .” 2 1 M o reo v er, t h i s Co u rt h as “ h el d t h at t h e tri al co u rt

2 1 D i xo n v. S t a t e , 3 5 0 G a

. Ap p

. 2 1 1

, 2 1 4 (1 ) (8 28 SE2 d 4 2 7 ) (2 0 1 9 ); a cco r d

W i l ker s o n v. S t a t e , 35 6 Ga. Ap p

. 8 3 1

, 8 3 3 (1 ) (8 4 9 SE2 d 6 7 7 ) (2 0 2 0); see En t wi s l e

v. St a t e , 3 4 0 Ga. Ap p

. 1 2 2

, 1 3 1 (2 ) (7 9 6 SE2 d 7 4 3 ) (2 0 1 7 ) (“ Ou r rev i ew o f t h e reco rd

s h o ws t h at al t h o u g h t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t m ak e s peci fi c fi nd i n g s reg ard i n g wh et h er

t h e p ro b at i v e v al u e o f t h e p ri o r cri m e s w a s o ut wei g h ed b y i t s p reju d i ci al i m p act

, i t

13s at i s fi es i t s o b l i g at i on i f t h e fi n d i n g s ap pear i n t h e o rd er d en y in g t h e m o t i o n fo r n ew

t ri al .” 2 2 An d h e r e, i n ad d i t i on to ex p l ai n i n g i t s ru l in g u n d er t he Ru l e 4 0 3 bal an ci n g

t es t at t he co n cl u s i o n o f t h e m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al h eari n g, t he t ri al co u rt s peci fi cal l y

s t at ed i n i t s ord er d en y i n g We b b ’s m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al t h at i t fo u n d th e pro b at i v e

v al u e o f t h e p ri o r co n v i ct i o n w as n o t ou t w ei g h ed by t h e d an ger o f u n fai r p reju d i ce.

As a res ul t

, W eb b h as no t s h o wn t h at t h e t ri al co u rt fai l ed t o p erfo rm i t s d u ty i n t h i s

reg ard

. 2 3

W eb b fu rt h er arg u es t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y fai l in g t o ru l e t h at t he ev i d en ce

o f hi s p ri o r DUI p er s e co n v i ct i o n was i n ad m i s s i b l e u n d er Ru l e 4 0 3

, as s ert i n g t h at i t s

p reju d i ci al i m

p act far o u t wei g h ed an y p ro b at i v e val u e. Bu t s et t i n g as i d e wh et h er t h e

t ri al co u rt erred b y ad m i tt i n g t h e e v i d e n ce, we fi n d t h at an y al l eg ed erro r i n t h i s

ex p li ci t l y referen ced t h e bal an ci n g tes t an d n o t ed t h at ‘ t h e ev id en ce m u st sat i s fy Ru l e 4 0 3 .’ ”).

2 2 Di xo n , 3 5 0 Ga. Ap p

. at 2 1 4 (1 ).

2 3 S ee W i l ker s o n , 35 6 Ga. Ap p

. at 8 3 3 (1 ) (fi n d i n g t h at d efen dan t di d no t s h o w

t h at t ri al co u rt fai l ed t o co n d u ct Ru l e 4 0 3 b al an ci ng t es t gi v en t h at co u rt h el d h eari n g

o n p ri o r act s ev id en ce b efo re ru l i n g t h at t h e ev i d e n c e wa s ad m i s s i b l e); Di xo n , 3 5 0

Ga. Ap p

. at 2 1 4 -1 5 (1 ) (h o l di ng t h at g i v en t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s rev i ew o f t h e i s s u es u n d er Ru l e 4 0 3

, al o n g w i t h it s ex p l an at i o n s an d an al y s i s i n i t s o rd er d en y i ng t h e m o t i o n fo r

n ew t ri al

, d efen d an t d id t o dem o n s t rat e t h at t h e co u rt fai l ed t o b a l a n c e wh e t h er t h e

p ro b at i v e v al u e o f h i s p ri o r act s was o u t wei g h ed b y t h ei r p reju d i ci al i m

p act ).

14reg ard was h arm l es s

. In d eed

, in m ak in g t h i s d et erm i nat i on , “ we rev i ew t h e reco rd d e

n o v o an d wei g h t h e ev i d en ce as we wo u l d e x p e ct reas o n ab l e ju ro rs t o h av e d o n e

s o .” 2 4 An d i m

p o rt an t ly

, th e t es t fo r d et erm i n i n g n o n co n s ti t u t i o n al h arm l es s erro r i s

“ wh et h er i t i s h i g h l y

p ro b ab l e t h at t h e erro r d i d n o t co n t ri b u t e t o t h e v erd i ct .” 2 5

Here, t h e ev i den ce s u p p o rt i ng W eb b ’ s DUI p er s e co n v i ct i o n was s u b s t an t i al

.

Th ere was n o di s p u t e t h at W eb b w as d ri vi n g h i s v eh i cl e wh e n i t c r o s s e d o v er t h e

cen t er l i ne an d co l l i d ed wi t h a g u ard rai l

. An d al t h o u g h W eb b cl ai m s t hat t he acci d en t

wa s a r e s u l t o f h i s m ed i cal co n d it i on , h i s p erfo rm an ce o n t he fi el d -s o bri et y t es t s

s u g g es t ed h e was i m

p ai red

, h e em an at ed an al co h o l i c-b ev erag e od o r, an d h i s b reat h,

i n fact , t es t ed p o s i t i v e fo r al co h o l

. Fu rt h erm o re, W eb b ’ s bl o o d

— d rawn b y an EM T

at th e s c en e o f t h e acci d en t— had a b l oo d -al co h o l co nt en t o f 0 .0 8 8 g ram s p er 1 0 0

m i l l il i t ers , wi t h a m arg i n o f erro r o f p l us or m in us 0

. 0 05 g ram s p er 1 0 0

m i l l il i t ers

—

p l aci n g t h at co nt en t o v er t h e l eg al l i m i t o f 0

. 0 8

, ev en if o n e s u b t ract ed

t h e m arg i n o f erro r. Acco rd in g l y , it i s h i g hl y p ro b ab le t h at W eb b ’ s p ri o r D UI p er s e

2 4 Jo n es v. S t a t e , 3 0 1 Ga. 5 4 4

, 5 5 1 (3 ) (8 0 2 SE2 d 2 34 ) (2 01 7 ) (p u n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed ).

2 5 Id

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

15g u i l t y p l ea d i d n o t co n t ri b u t e t o t h e ju ry ’ s v e r d i c t o f g u i l t y as t o DUI p er s e i n t h i s

m at t er. 2 6

Th at s ai d, ev en t h o ug h t h e t ri al co u rt d id n o t co m m i t r e v e r s i b l e erro r i n t h i s

cas e, we wo ul d b e rem i s s i n n eg l ect i n g t o ad v i s e St at e p ro s ecu t o rs t o ex erci s e

ci rcu m s p ect i o n i n s eek i ng t o ad m i t p ri or act s ev i d en ce i n cas es l i k e t h i s o n e. To b e

s u re, t h e Su p rem e Co u rt o f Geo rg i a h as t h u s far d ecl i n ed t o ad op t a cat eg o ri cal ru l e

t h at ex t ri n s i c act ev i d en ce i s i n ad m i s s i b l e as t o i n t en t i n DU I c a s es b ecau se DUI i s

a cri m e o f g en eral i n t en t ; 2 7 b u t wi t h i n t h e v ery s am e o p i ni o n o ur Su p rem e Co u rt

n o n et h el es s n o t ed t h at “ i f th e St at e’ s t hres h o ld t o p ro v e in t en t as a n e l e m e n t o f a

cri m e i s rel at i v el y l ow, as i t l ik el y i s wh en t h e ch arg ed cri m e i s o ne o f g en eral i n t en t

,

2 6 S ee i d

. at 5 5 1 (3 ) (h o l d i n g t h at t ri al co urt ’ s erro r i n a d m i t t i n g d efen d an t ’ s

p ri o r DUI co n v i ct i o n i n p ro s ecu t i o n fo r DUI p er s e— g i v en th at it s p reju d i ci al i m p act

s u b s t an t i al l y o ut wei g h ed i t s p ro b at i v e v al u e— was h arm le ss in ligh t o f o v erwh el m i n g

ev i d en ce o f d efen d an t ’ s g u il t t o t h e DUI-p er s e ch arg e was o v erwh el m in g ); S mi t h v. S t a t e , 3 56 G a. Ap p

. 2 1 1

, 2 1 3 -1 4 (1 ) (8 4 4 SE2 d 8 6 9 ) (2 0 20 ) (h ol d i n g t h at tri al co urt ’ s

erro r u n der Ru l e 4 0 3, i f an y , i n ad m i t t in g ev i d en ce o f d efen d an t ’ s p ri o r arres t fo r DUI

was h arm l es s , in p ro s ecu t i o n fo r v eh i cu l ar ho m i ci d e p red i cat ed o n DUI p er s e g i v en

t h at d efen d an t ad m i t t e d t h a t h e was d ri v er o f v eh i cl e t hat co l l id ed wi t h m o t o rcy cl e

an d t h at h e had b een d ri n ki ng a l co h o l b efo re d ri v i n g , an d d efen d an t ’ s b l o o d tes t

rev eal ed BAC wel l i n ex ces s o f .0 8 l eg al l i m i t ).

2 7 S e e J o n es , 3 0 1 G a. at 5 4 8 (2 ) (refu s in g t o ad o p t a b ri g h t -l in e ru l e t h at

ex t ri ns i c act ev i d en ce i s i n ad m i s s i b l e as t o i n t en t i n DUI cas es b ecau s e DUI is a cri m e

o f g en eral i n t en t wh ere in t en t m ay b e i n ferred fro m th e d o i ng o f an act

, i

. e., d ri v i n g aft er co n su m in g al co h o l).

16t h en t h e p ro b at i v e v al u e o f t h e ex t r i n s i c a ct ev i den ce wo u l d neces s ari l y b e

m i n i m al .” 2 8 So

, g i v en th i s p o t en t i al pi t fal l

, St at e p ro s ecu t o rs wo u l d be wi s e to

ex erci s e cau t i o n b efo re p res en t i n g ev i d en ce o f p ri or DUI co n vi ct i o n s to s ho w i n t en t

an d fi rs t as k t h em s el v es wh et h er “ w h a t [t h ey ] wa n t an d wh at [t h ey ] n eed has b een

co n fu s ed ,” 2 9 l es t o t herwi s e u n o b ject i o n ab l e co n vi ct i o n s b eco m e can d i d at es fo r

rev ers al

.

Fo r al l t hes e reas o ns , we affi rm W eb b ’ s co n v i ct i on an d th e d en i al o f h i s m o t i o n

fo r n ew t ri al

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Mer ci er

a n d Co lvi n , JJ., co n cu r

.

2 8 Id

.

2 9 S ee R.E.M

., Fi n es t W

o rks o n g, o n Do cu m en t (I.R. S

. R e c or ds 1 987) ( e m ph as i s i n o ri g i n al ).

17