MILLER v. the STATE., 343 Ga. App. 197

On Nov. 19, 2014, Miller rear-ended a vehicle; trooper observed alcohol odor, bloodshot/watery eyes, and HGN clues; Miller refused the state-administered blood test after a positive preliminary breath test.
Miller was arrested and later convicted by a jury of DUI (less safe) and following too closely; sentenced to jail and probation.
The State sought to admit Miller’s March 30, 2006 DUI conviction under OCGA § 24-4-417 to show knowledge, plan, or absence of mistake in refusing the chemical test.
At a pretrial similar-transaction hearing, the trial court admitted the 2006 conviction; the court initially did not perform a Rule 403 balancing but later, post-trial, concluded its failure to apply Rule 403 did not harm Miller.
Miller moved for a new trial arguing the prior conviction was unduly prejudicial and too remote in time; the trial court denied the motion and this appeal followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of prior DUI under OCGA § 24-4-417	Miller: 2006 conviction (≈8 years old) is too remote; probative value diminished and prejudicial effect increased, so should be excluded	State: Prior DUI is admissible to show knowledge/absence of mistake for refusing test; trial court has discretion and probative value remains	Court: Affirmed admission — Rule 417 permits the evidence; even assuming Rule 403 applies, trial court did not abuse discretion in finding probative value not substantially outweighed by prejudice
Scope of testimony about 2006 incident / limiting details	Miller: Trial should have limited testimony to narrow facts rather than full incident	State: Trial objections did not preserve a narrower-scope claim; whole-incident testimony was permissible under Rule 417	Court: Issue not preserved on appeal; objections at trial differed so appellate claim waived

Masood v. State, 313 Ga. App. 549 (establishing standard of view of evidence on appeal)
State v. Frost, 297 Ga. 296 (prior DUI can strengthen inference of awareness of intoxication and explain refusal)
Gibbs v. State, 341 Ga. App. 316 (discussing whether Rule 403 applies to Rule 417 evidence)
Kim v. State, 337 Ga. App. 155 (presuming without deciding that Rule 403 may apply to Rule 417)
Buckholts v. State, 283 Ga. App. 254 (time lapse is a factor, not dispositive, in balancing probative value vs prejudice)
Evans v. State, 287 Ga. App. 74 (16-year gap did not automatically render prior DUI inadmissible)
Murdock v. State, 299 Ga. 177 (presumption that trial court understood and exercised its discretion)
Turner v. State, 299 Ga. 720 (preservation and appellate review principles)