Jackson v. the State
340 Ga. App. 228
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Abraham Lincoln Jackson was stopped for speeding, and officer developed probable cause to arrest him for DUI (drugs).
- Jackson was read Georgia’s implied-consent notice, affirmatively agreed to testing, was taken to the sheriff’s office, and voluntarily extended his arm for a blood draw.
- Jackson moved to suppress the blood-test results, arguing (1) he did not give actual (voluntary) consent and (2) OCGA § 40-6-392(a)(2) authorizes blood draws only to determine alcohol, not drugs.
- The trial court denied the motion to suppress; Jackson obtained interlocutory appellate review.
- The State did not assert exigent circumstances; the appeal therefore focused on voluntariness of consent and the statutory scope for drug testing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Jackson gave actual, voluntary consent to the blood draw | Jackson: affirmative response to implied-consent form alone is insufficient; State produced no additional evidence of voluntariness | State: totality of circumstances (reading of implied-consent, affirmative agreement, no threats, voluntary extension of arm) shows actual consent | Court: affirmed — under totality, consent was voluntary and admissible |
| Whether OCGA § 40-6-392(a)(2) limits blood draws to alcohol testing only | Jackson: subsection’s wording means blood may be drawn only to determine alcohol content | State: subsection describes who may draw blood for alcohol testing; other statutory provisions (OCGA § 40-5-55 and § 40-6-392(a)(1)) authorize testing for drugs if done under statutory procedures | Court: affirmed — statute does not prohibit blood testing for drugs; drug testing admissible if procedures of §40-6-392 are followed |
Key Cases Cited
- Williams v. State, 296 Ga. 817 (Supreme Court of Georgia) (warrantless search requires exigent circumstances or actual consent; implied-consent compliance alone is not necessarily actual consent)
- Brooks v. State, 285 Ga. App. 624 (Georgia Court of Appeals) (standard of review on suppression rulings)
- Jacobs v. State, 338 Ga. App. 743 (Georgia Court of Appeals) (factors for voluntariness under totality of circumstances; affirmative response to implied-consent can be evidence of actual consent)
- Cuaresma v. State, 292 Ga. App. 43 (Georgia Court of Appeals) (consent involuntariness factors: fear, intimidation, threats, lengthy detention)
- Padgett v. State, 329 Ga. App. 747 (Georgia Court of Appeals) (statutory compliance under §40-6-392(a) governs admissibility of state-administered chemical tests)
- Head v. State, 246 Ga. 360 (Supreme Court of Georgia) (Legislature may treat alcohol differently; lack of specified procedures for drug testing does not automatically render drug tests inadmissible)