ADAMS v. the STATE.
809 S.E.2d 87
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- On July 2, 2016 Trooper found Gregory Adams beside an overturned pickup; trooper detected alcohol odor, bloodshot eyes, slowed speech, and Adams declined several field tests but showed 6/6 HGN clues. Trooper arrested Adams for DUI and requested a state blood test; Adams refused.
- Trooper filed a sworn report with DDS to trigger an administrative license suspension (ALS). At the ALS hearing, defense counsel and the trooper agreed to a written stipulation (ALS Stipulation) that the trooper would withdraw the report if Adams pled guilty to DUI; Adams ultimately did not plead guilty and was tried.
- At trial the State introduced the trooper’s testimony, an audio recording of the roadside encounter, the ALS Stipulation (read to the jury and sent to jurors during deliberations), and testimony about a prior June 2011 DUI arrest in which Adams had refused testing.
- Adams was convicted of DUI less safe, failure to maintain lane, and following too closely, and appealed asserting several evidentiary errors.
- The Court of Appeals considered waiver and plain-error doctrines, Rule 417 (other DUI incidents), Rule 403 balancing, and the continuing-witness rule in affirming the convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Adams) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of ALS Stipulation | Stipulation was irrelevant, unfairly prejudicial, and not an admission by Adams; trial court should have excluded it and granted mistrial | Stipulation was relevant to prove guilt context and admissible; no timely objection made at trial | Waived for failure to object; no plain error — Flading controls; admission affirmed |
| Defense counsel testifying about ALS negotiations | Court improperly barred counsel from testifying; parole evidence should be admissible to show agreement terms | Counsel cross‑examined trooper; defense made no proffer showing material difference | No reversible harm shown (no proffer); claim fails |
| Sending ALS Stipulation to jury (continuing‑witness rule) | Sending written stipulation back to jury violated continuing witness rule and tainted deliberations | Document was reasonably arguable as non‑testimonial/original documentary evidence; trial court gave limiting instruction | No timely objection, waived; even under plain‑error review error not clear under current law, so no reversal |
| Admission of prior June 2011 DUI incident (Rule 417/403) | Prior incident inadmissible because it lacked a conviction and was unfairly prejudicial | Rule 417 permits admission of another DUI (commission) to show knowledge/plan; probative value not substantially outweighed by prejudice | Trial court did not abuse discretion: Rule 417 admits prior commission (conviction not required); evidence relevant to knowledge/plan; Rule 403 challenge waived by incomplete record |
Key Cases Cited
- Danley v. State, 342 Ga. App. 61 (discussing appellate review of sufficiency and viewing evidence in light most favorable to verdict)
- Flading v. State, 327 Ga. App. 346 (admission of ALS stipulation held relevant and not unduly prejudicial)
- Wilson v. State, 301 Ga. 83 (plain‑error four‑part test for evidentiary rulings)
- Rainwater v. State, 300 Ga. 800 (continuing witness rule explained; scope under new Evidence Code)
- Frost v. State, 297 Ga. 296 (Rule 417 is rule of inclusion; prior DUI admissible to show knowledge or plan)
- Gibbs v. State, 341 Ga. App. 316 (prior DUI can show knowledge of testing procedures and motive to refuse)
- Davis v. State, 285 Ga. 343 (distinguishing testimonial writings from original documentary evidence for jury use)