Your Government Is Tough on Crime

Seven new decisions were issued by the Court of Appeals yesterday.  (An eighth was also issued, but was not a "new" decision, rather, it implemented a Supreme Court ruling in an older case.)  All seven decisions were criminal cases.  All seven decisions affirmed convictions.  Contrast this to the State v. Hamby decision discussed yesterday, which excluded evidence against the criminal defendants which evidence was likely to prove guilt. A day like yesterday should drive home to anyone concerned that Georgia's courts just find reasons to let guilty parties go free that there is no such pattern.  

Sticking with the theme of "news you can use," the case that probably impacts the largest number of people is Miller v. State, a DUI case.  The issue in Miller was whether the the police officer who arrested the driver coerced the driver into taking a breathalyzer test, which test showed a blood alcohol content of .124 or .129.  Particularly, the defendant contended that when the police officer told him “[A]s long as you continue to be cool or whatever and be cooperative, what I'll do is, is I'll make the process go by real quick”, he (the defendant) felt that the police officer was threatening him.

The trial court disagreed, and so did the Court of Appeals, finding that those words were not threatening, and not deceptive.  In a past case, the words “if you blow under the legal limit I can let you go home to your son, and everything will be fine” were viewed as too deceptive, and resulted in exclusion of the test.

No pithy lesson here.  Safest way to avoid a DUI arrest and conviction has been, and always will be, not to drink and drive.