313 Ga. App. 745
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Emily Davenport was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol in Georgia.
- Davenport appealed the conviction challenging the trial court's denial of a subpoena to an out-of-state witness.
- The trial court denied the subpoena, deeming the witness not necessary and material.
- This Court affirmed the judgment before the Georgia Supreme Court intervened.
- The Georgia Supreme Court vacated and remanded, directing us to apply the correct statute and reconsider the subpoena issue.
- On remand, the trial court must determine whether the witness is a material witness and whether a certificate allowing an out-of-state subpoena should issue; if so, Davenport may seek a new trial or a new trial conditioned on subpoena issuance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| whether the witness is a material witness | Davenport argues the witness is material. | State contends the court should apply the statutory framework. | Remand to apply the correct statute and decide materiality |
| whether the court should use OCGA § 24-10-94 alone | Davenport urges proper statute dictates materiality determination. | State asserts statutory requirements dictate whether to issue a subpoena certificate. | Remand to apply the correct statute and revisit subpoena decision |
| potential remedies if material | Davenport seeks a new trial or conditioned new trial upon subpoena. | State opposes unless warranted by materiality and certificate outcomes. | If material, determine appropriate remedy; otherwise judgment stands pending appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Spann v. State, 310 Ga.App. 575 (Ga. App. 2011) (guides remedies for out-of-state subpoenas)
- DiMauro v. State, 310 Ga.App. 526 (Ga. App. 2011) (discusses post-remand remedies in subpoena context)
- Davenport v. State, 289 Ga. 399 (Ga. 2011) (establishes statutory framework for materiality vs. necessity)