328 Ga. App. 850
Ga. Ct. App.2014Background
- Davenport was convicted of DUI (per se) and sought an out-of-state subpoena for a witness under the Uniform Act to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses From Without the State (former OCGA § 24-10-90 et seq.).
- Trial court denied her motion for a certificate of materiality (to issue the out-of-state subpoena); Davenport appealed and this Court initially affirmed.
- The Georgia Supreme Court vacated and remanded instructing the Court of Appeals to apply the correct statute and have the trial court revisit the subpoena request.
- On remand, the trial court again denied the certificate after a hearing based on the previously admitted evidence, finding Davenport’s showing of materiality speculative.
- Davenport moved for reconsideration arguing constitutional challenges (Confrontation, due process, compulsory process); the trial court denied reconsideration without elaboration, and Davenport appealed. The Court of Appeals affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Davenport made a sufficient factual showing to justify issuance of an out-of-state subpoena/certificate of materiality | Davenport argued she needed the out-of-state witness and the trial court erred in denying the certificate | State argued trial court properly found the witness was not material and that Davenport’s proffer was speculative | Affirmed: trial court did not err; Davenport’s showing was speculative and insufficient |
| Whether denial violated right to compulsory process | Davenport argued denial deprived her of compulsory process and a fair trial | State argued trial court properly exercised discretion under former OCGA §24-10-94(a) so no compulsory process violation | Denied: compulsory process claim lacks merit because trial court properly found witness not material |
| Whether denial violated Confrontation Clause | Davenport argued her confrontation rights were violated by refusal to secure the witness | State maintained prior cases resolved this against Davenport | Denied: Confrontation Clause claim rejected consistent with precedent |
| Whether constitutional attack on Uniform Act is reviewable | Davenport raised constitutional attack on the statute | State noted trial court did not rule on statute’s constitutionality | Not reached: appellate review precluded because trial court did not rule on the constitutional challenge |
Key Cases Cited
- Davenport v. State, 313 Ga. App. 745 (Ga. Ct. App.) (remand decision addressing reapplication to trial court)
- Davenport v. State, 303 Ga. App. 401 (Ga. Ct. App.) (initial Court of Appeals decision affirming denial)
- Davenport v. State, 289 Ga. 399 (Ga.) (Supreme Court decision vacating and remanding for correct statutory application)
- Cronkite v. State, 293 Ga. 476 (Ga.) (compulsory process claim addressed where court found no violation when witness not material)
- Phillips v. State, 324 Ga. App. 728 (Ga. Ct. App.) (Confrontation Clause and subpoena-materiality issues resolved against defendant)
- Young v. State, 324 Ga. App. 127 (Ga. Ct. App.) (issue-preclusion where trial court did not rule on constitutional challenge)
- Bell v. Cochran, 244 Ga. App. 510 (Ga. Ct. App.) (timeliness of appeal following post-conviction procedural rulings)