Wright v. State
313 Ga. App. 829
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- January 8, 2009: confidential informant indicates Wright will transport cocaine between McRae and Milan in a vehicle driven by Wright's wife.
- Deputy stops the vehicle for a missing tag light; wife is driver, Wright is in front passenger seat, another passenger in rear area.
- Wife consents to search; 1.96 grams of cocaine found in a purse in the center console; Wright has $1,572 on him; all three arrested.
- Wife testifies the cocaine was not hers; Wright allegedly placed it in her purse to avoid search and to shift charges to her.
- Investigator testifies a second passenger disclosed Wright admitted placing cocaine in the purse and his fear of accumulating drug charges.
- Similar transaction: August 2009 undercover purchase from Wright; videotaped; deputy and informant identify Wright; Wright indicted for sale of cocaine.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of the August 2009 similar transaction | Wright argues evidence rests on hearsay/unreliable witnesses and should be excluded. | State contends three-prong Williams test satisfied; evidence properly admitted for intent. | Admissible; trial court did not abuse discretion under three-prong test. |
| Sufficiency of proof without similar transaction | Absent similar transaction, evidence is insufficient for guilt beyond reasonable doubt. | Evidence at trial, including drugs, money, and officer testimony, suffices. | Sufficient evidence to support conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| Failure to make explicit findings on purpose for similar transaction | Court failed to make explicit record findings as to purpose for admitting similar transaction evidence. | Defendant did not object on the precise basis; on-record statements supported admissibility. | Waived for lack of objection; no reversible error. |
Key Cases Cited
- Watley v. State, 281 Ga.App. 244 (Ga. App. 2006) (three-prong test for admissibility of similar transactions; USCR 31.3)
- Williams v. State, 261 Ga. 640 (Ga. 1991) (requires explicit record findings for each Williams requirement)
- Parker v. State, 244 Ga.App. 419 (Ga. App. 2000) (hearsay/underlying evidence at USCR 31.3 hearing admissibility principles)
- Inman v. State, 281 Ga. 67 (Ga. 2006) (investigator's observations of prior offense; non-hearsay at USCR 31.3 hearing)
- Morrison v. State, 300 Ga.App. 405 (Ga. App. 2009) (relevance and sufficiency of evidence in similar-transaction context)