Carter v. State
302 Ga. 200
| Ga. | 2017Background
- On July 11, 2013, Dequavious Reed was found shot to death in his home; three brothers (including appellant D’Andre Carter) were implicated. A pond later yielded a firearm identified as the murder weapon.
- Jayvias Lott, cooperating and wearing a recording device, recorded a conversation with Carter and a third party, Kavozeia Walker; Carter made inculpatory statements describing entering the house, watching Reed die, rifling pockets, and throwing the gun in the pond.
- Walker’s portions of the recorded conversation were played at trial though Walker did not testify; the court instructed the jury not to consider Walker’s statements as proof of Carter’s guilt or for their truth.
- A separate 45‑second jailhouse telephone recording of Carter was admitted so the jury could compare voice and laughter with the Lott recording; trial counsel did not preserve some authentication and foundation objections.
- Carter was convicted of malice murder, armed robbery, and first‑degree burglary and sentenced to life without parole plus consecutive terms; he appealed raising insufficiency of the evidence and evidentiary and Confrontation Clause challenges to the recordings.
Issues
| Issue | Carter's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Evidence insufficient to prove Carter’s guilt, and burglary not supported | Recorded confession, eyewitness/physical evidence (weapon recovered), and testimony support convictions | Evidence sufficient under Jackson v. Virginia; burglary supported by entry under pretense to buy drugs then theft |
| Admissibility of Walker’s recorded statements (relevancy/Rule 403) | Walker’s statements were irrelevant and unduly prejudicial/confusing | Walker’s remarks provided context for Carter’s admissions; probative value not substantially outweighed by prejudice | Admission was within trial court’s discretion; not excluded under OCGA § 24‑4‑402/403 |
| Hearsay / Confrontation Clause (Walker’s statements) | Walker’s out‑of‑court statements were hearsay and violated confrontation rights because he did not testify | Statements were not offered for their truth but to provide context for Carter’s admissions; jury instructed; even if testimonial, Confrontation Clause not implicated when used for non‑truth purposes | Walker’s portion was not hearsay and did not violate the Confrontation Clause; jury instruction presumed followed |
| Admissibility & authentication of jail call recording | Recording inadmissible hearsay, lacked foundation/authentication and proper testimony as to calling cards | Recording was offered to compare voice/laughter (not for truth), so not hearsay; authentication/foundation objections not preserved; any error not plain and not affecting outcome | No reversible error: call not hearsay; authentication/foundation objections reviewed for plain error and failed (no showing of affected outcome) |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
- Adkins v. State, 301 Ga. 153 (Ga. 2017) (abuse of discretion review for evidentiary rulings)
- Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (statements to informants/government agents may be non‑testimonial)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (Confrontation Clause principles)
- United States v. Dodds, 347 F.3d 893 (11th Cir. 2003) (Rule 403 balancing favoring admissibility)
- Kelly v. State, 290 Ga. 29 (Ga. 2011) (federal plain error standard adopted for appellate review)
- Francis v. Franklin, 471 U.S. 307 (presumption that jurors follow limiting instructions)