Preview:

Final Copy 287 Ga. 473 S10A0220. THE STATE v. BROWN. NAHMIAS, Justice. Roger Brown was indicted in Cobb County for murder and other crimes. He moved to suppress certain statements he made during an interview with police officers on the night of the crimes. The trial court found that Brown invoked his right to counsel during the interview, and it suppressed "[a]ny statement taken subsequent" to that invocation. The State appeals that order, and we reverse. 1. On January 18, 2008, Brown allegedly killed one victim by striking

him with a hammer and injured two other victims by striking them with a hammer and pry bar. He was detained and transported to Cobb County Police headquarters. There he was interviewed by Detectives Ord and McCauley for approximately 15 minutes. The interview was video recorded and later

transcribed. Because the factual context of the interview is important in deciding the legal issues presented, we recount what the video recording and transcript show in some detail.

At the outset of the interview, while Detective McCauley went to get Brown coffee, Brown launched into an explanation of the crimes, claiming that he had acted in self-defense. Detective Ord did not encourage this explanation. Instead, he interrupted Brown and started to go over an advice of rights form that first collected basic biographical data and information regarding Brown's ability to understand his rights and then set forth his Miranda rights, see Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (86 SC 1602, 16 LE2d 694) (1966). The discussion was interrupted by Brown, who wanted to know if the victim was "alright." Detective Ord replied that the victim had been taken to a local hospital. Brown made another statement about the crimes, saying the victim "came across two parking lots away from me you know holding a bat and stuff," before noting that he was worried about the victim. Detective Ord again did not encourage Brown to provide more information about the crimes, but instead continued reading the advice of rights form. Detective Ord advised Brown of his Miranda rights, including his right to remain silent and the following detailed explanation of his right to counsel: You have the right to talk to a lawyer for advice before we ask you any questions and to have him with you during questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer one will be appointed for you before any 2

questioning if you wish. If you decide to answer questions now without a lawyer present you will still have the right to stop answering at any time. You also have the right to stop answering at any time until you talk to a lawyer. Brown stated that he understood his rights, and then he invoked his right to counsel, saying "I want a lawyer," followed by an explanation of why he was asking for a lawyer. Detective Ord confirmed, "Ok, so you're saying you want a lawyer?" and Brown repeated, "I want a lawyer." Immediately after that confirming statement, however, Brown asked the detective if he could "get bonded and go home." Detective Ord answered, "I don't know right at this time, ok." Brown then asked if he was being charged with anything, and the detective replied, "Well, right now, we've got a lot going on, I'm being completely honest with you . . . ." Brown interrupted to volunteer more information about the crimes, ending by saying that he wanted to tell the police the truth but would rather have a lawyer present. Detective Ord responded that "we completely understand that." After another interruption by Brown, the detective reiterated that "we understand you want a lawyer" and offered, if Brown knew of a lawyer, to try to contact him. Brown said that he had a lawyer in Lumpkin County. Detective 3

Ord asked, "do you want us to . . . contact him now," and Brown said that would be fine and that the lawyer's information was in his wallet. Detective Ord said, "[w]e can try to do that. The only reason I said that. . . ." Brown interrupted to say "[h]is name is Jeffery Ward." Detective Ord again stated, "[t]he only reason I said that is umm you know . . . ." Brown again cut off the detective and said the lawyer knows all about him and his family. Detective Ord then stated, "[t]he quicker we get a grasp on things the better we will be able to more accurately answer any questions you might have." Brown next said, "I'm worried about that feller that I got into it with," reiterated his desire to go home, and asked what he was being charged with. Detective Ord responded that, as soon as he knew, he would let Brown know. The detective then left the room to retrieve Brown's wallet from impound. When the detective returned, Brown stated several times that, if the lawyer's phone number was not in the wallet, they could contact someone at his house to get it, explaining that the lawyer "knows me very well" and "I would rather have him than anybody else." Brown then asked how long he would "sit before [he] got bond." Detective Ord replied that he was not sure, that no warrant had even been issued 4

for Brown's arrest and the police were in the initial stage of the investigation. Brown asked what information the police had and again began to describe the crime, saying "[w]e had a struggle." Detective Ord interrupted Brown and said: What I'd like to do is keep that on hold until we contact your attorney. Cause what I want to do is you've been advised of your rights, you want an attorney and I can certainly appreciate that. We don't want to do anything to circumvent your rights. Ok. But what I don't want to do is get into a dialogue within which may constitute you divulging information that you didn't necessarily intend too [sic]. Ok. If that makes much since [sic] as possible we're doing this to protect your rights that's the only reason why we aren't telling you any more details about the case. Cause if I was to say something that someone else told us, it may illicit [sic] a response from you, alright. And you have asked for your attorney to be sitting here with you, and then you guys make an educated decision together, how you want to pursue this. Ok. Brown responded, "Yes sir," and asked when he could get a phone call and where he would go next. Detective Ord responded that he it might be a while before Brown could get a phone call and that he would go to the Cobb County jail if he were charged. Brown asked again whether he would be charged with a crime, and the detective again answered that he did not know. Brown said that he appreciated how nice the detectives were being. Detective Ord said that he would try to contact Brown's attorney. Brown then volunteered that he had a criminal record and again said he was worried about the victim, 5

asking the detective to let him know how the victim was as soon as he found out. The detective said that he would, and Brown said he wanted to see the victim when he got out. Without any question from the detective, Brown then made his final statements about the crime. Detective Ord again did not follow up. Instead, the detectives took Brown to a holding cell, saying they would try to call Brown's attorney, and the interview ended. In his motion to suppress, Brown contended that, once Brown asked for a lawyer, the detectives violated his constitutional rights by continuing the interview. The trial court agreed, finding that Brown stated "I want a lawyer" after being read his Miranda rights and concluding that he "invoked his constitutional rights to counsel at this point" and that "[a]ny statement subsequent to this request shall not be allowable as direct evidence" at trial. The State then filed this interlocutory appeal. See OCGA

Download S10A0220. THE STATE v. BROWN.pdf

Georgia Law