Rogers v. State, 290 Ga. 18

Rogers was convicted of felony murder, aggravated assault of Barbara Drones, and burglary arising from a 2008 DeKalb County home invasion and subsequent events.
Around 10:30 p.m., the Droneses were in their apartment when a shotgun was fired; Gregory Drones was killed and Barbara Drones was assaulted.
Less than three hours later, Rogers sought medical treatment for a wrist wound; DNA from the Droneses’ apartment matched Rogers.
Sought to read Barbara Drones’ recorded interview into evidence; portions about prior drug use were excluded, but most of the statement describing the assailants was admitted.
Rogers challenged the admissibility of statements to a hospital investigator, asserting lack of voluntariness due to pain and injuries.
The State introduced jailhouse calls involving Rogers and an attorney; Rogers argued the communications were protected by attorney-client privilege.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Were Rogers' statements to the hospital investigator voluntary?	Rogers contends pain/injury rendered statements involuntary.	State contends voluntary despite pain; no coercive factors shown.	Statements deemed voluntary; no clear error.
Does attorney-client privilege bar admission of jailhouse recordings with third-party participation?	Privilege protects confidential communications; recordings should be excluded.	Recording parties included third person; privilege not applicable.	Recording admissible; privilege not extended to these circumstances.
Was it proper to admit Barbara Drones' statement portions and redact others, and was any error harmless?	Would prefer reading full statement; redactions may mislead jury.	Redaction limited to drug-use portions; rest admissible as describing assailants.	Admissible as read; any error harmless.
Was the evidence sufficient to sustain the convictions beyond a reasonable doubt?	Defendant argues alternate non-guilty hypotheses remain reasonable.	Sufficient circumstantial evidence to exclude other hypotheses.	Evidence sufficient to support guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Sanders v. State, 281 Ga. 36 (2006) (voluntariness of statements—pain not sole determinative factor)
Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368 (1964) (due process pretrial suppression standard)
Bryant v. State, 282 Ga. 631 (2007) (narrow construction of attorney-client privilege)
Preston v. State, 282 Ga. 210 (2007) (inmate recording disclosures and privacy expectations)
Ransom v. Ransom, 253 Ga. 656 (1985) (surveillance interception requirements and exceptions)
Burgeson v. State, 267 Ga. 102 (1996) (jail surveillance exception under statute)
Taylor v. Taylor, 179 Ga. 691 (1934) (presence of third parties affecting confidentiality of communications)
Cocroft v. Cocroft, 158 Ga. 714 (1924) (marital privilege and confidentiality when third party overhears)
Holsey v. State, 281 Ga. 177 (2006) (improper impeachment; related to statement recording)
Duckworth v. State, 268 Ga. 566 (1997) (evidentiary matters pertaining to statements and impeachments)
Worthy v. State, 253 Ga. 661 (1985) (hearsay and admissibility considerations in statements)
Cash v. State, 293 Ga.App. 702 (2008) (appellate review of trial court evidentiary rulings)