Durrence v. State
307 Ga. App. 817
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Durrence was convicted of three counts of child molestation involving his girlfriend's seven-year-old daughter, H.M.
- Sentenced as a recidivist to twenty years on each count, to run concurrently, with eight years to serve and the rest on probation.
- Durrence appealed asserting the pre-arrest statement was involuntary and Miranda-warnings were required, and that evidence of a report by A.P. (H.M.'s half-sister) should not have been excluded.
- The DFCS worker summoned a GBI agent to interview Durrence at the DFCS office; the interview occurred without arrest, with Durrence free to leave.
- The trial court ruled Durrence's statement was noncustodial and voluntary, and that the A.P. report was admissible only upon proper discretion; the appellate record on the A.P. report was incomplete.
- The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed, holding no Miranda violation and no abuse of discretion in the evidentiary rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Miranda custody and voluntariness | Durrence argues he was in custody and needed Miranda warnings. | Durrence contends the interview was custodial due to DFCS lure, requiring warnings. | Not in custody; warnings not required. |
| Admission of A.P. report and cross-examination rights | State's in limine ruling foreclosed impeachment evidence and Crawford issues. | Durrence argues cross-examination and confrontation were violated; wanted to impeach a defense witness. | No clear abuse; Crawford not applicable; the record was insufficient to evaluate the ruling; cross-examination rights not violated as argued. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Folsom, 285 Ga. 11 (2009) (uses objective custody standard for Miranda warnings)
- Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368 (1964) (standard for determining voluntariness of statements)
- Hendrix v. State, 230 Ga.App. 604 (1997) (custody findings reviewed for clear error)
- Axelburg v. State, 294 Ga.App. 612 (2008) (Miranda custody issue; credibility of factual findings)
- Cantu v. State, 304 Ga.App. 655 (2010) (hearsay and admissibility; burden on party proffering error)
- Leatherwood v. State, 212 Ga.App. 342 (1994) (impeachment and admissibility of prior statements; cross-examination nuances)
- Warner v. State, 281 Ga. 763 (2007) (impeachment of witnesses; state may attack its own witness)