State v. Jones
297 Ga. 156
| Ga. | 2015Background
- On Jan. 21, 2011 Cherokee County deputy stopped Michael Jones for speeding; officer detected alcohol odor and signs of intoxication; breath tests showed .147 and .139.
- Jones was charged with DUI per se (OCGA §40-6-391(a)(5)), DUI less safe (OCGA §40-6-391(a)(1)), and speeding; State sought to introduce Jones’ 2005 conviction for DUI less safe under OCGA §24-4-404(b).
- Trial court admitted the prior conviction limitedly to show intent and knowledge; jury convicted Jones; DUI less safe was merged into DUI per se for sentencing.
- Court of Appeals reversed the DUI per se conviction holding other-acts evidence was irrelevant because the charged offenses were general intent crimes requiring no specific culpable mental state.
- Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari, applied the federal three-part test (Bradshaw/Eleventh Circuit approach) for Rule 404(b)/403 admissibility, and reversed the Court of Appeals, holding the prior conviction was relevant to intent/knowledge; remanded for Rule 403 analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Jones) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of prior DUI conviction under OCGA §24-4-404(b) | Prior conviction is admissible to show intent and knowledge (bent of mind), tending to prove Jones voluntarily drove while intoxicated on the charged occasion | Prior DUI is irrelevant because the charged offenses are general-intent crimes and require no specific intent, so prior acts cannot prove the mental element | Reversed Court of Appeals: other-acts evidence may be relevant to show intent/knowledge in general-intent crimes if it tends to make a consequential fact more probable |
| Applicability of federal three-part test for other-acts evidence | Georgia should follow Eleventh Circuit approach (relevance for purpose other than character; Rule 403 balancing; sufficient proof of the other act) | Not disputed that federal test should guide, but disputed application here | Georgia adopts the Eleventh Circuit three-part test (Bradshaw/Eleventh Circuit) for OCGA §§24-4-404(b) and 24-4-403 |
| Whether intent was a material issue when defendant pleaded not guilty | State: pleading not guilty places intent at issue unless withdrawn; therefore prior act probative on intent | Jones: argued intent not at issue because crime is general intent | Court: pleading not guilty leaves intent in issue absent affirmative withdrawal; prior act relevant to intent |
| Whether Rule 403 requires exclusion despite admissibility under 404(b) | State: limited probative need to prove intent/knowledge supports admission | Jones: prior conviction risked unfair prejudice and propensity inference requiring exclusion | Court remanded to Court of Appeals to review whether trial court abused discretion under Rule 403; cautioned strong potential for prejudice and need for careful balancing |
Key Cases Cited
- Bradshaw v. State, 296 Ga. 650 (adopts Eleventh Circuit three-part test for other-acts evidence)
- Beechum v. United States, 582 F.2d 898 (5th Cir.) (extrinsic-offense admissibility framework; intent analysis)
- Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (extrinsic acts often necessary to prove state of mind; relevance of repetitive conduct)
- United States v. Jernigan, 341 F.3d 1273 (11th Cir.) (Rule 404(b) as inclusionary; prior acts relevant to knowledge/intent)
- United States v. Ellisor, 522 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir.) (adopted as persuasive framework for OCGA 24-4-404(b))
- Ogilvie v. State, 292 Ga. 6 (discusses mens rea and proof of criminal intent)
- Cornwell v. State, 283 Ga. 247 (discusses inferences from previous similar conduct to show voluntariness/intention)