Jackson v. Motel 6 Multipurpose, Inc. Motion for Leave to File and Brief Amicus Curiae in Support of Suggestion of Rehearing En Banc

    Paw yews. Wee 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY 

  

- STATE OF GEORGIA 

  

THE STATE OF GEORGIA ) 

) 
Vs. ) CRIMINAL ACTION 

) 
BEN WRIGHT, ) INDICTMENT NO. Z16064 

) 
Defendant. ) 

MOTION FOR DISCOVERY AND INSPECTION OF ALL 
EVIDENCE FAVORABLE TO THE DEFENDANT 

AND NOTICE TO PRODUCE 

COMES NOW BEN WRIGHT, Defendant in the above-styled case 

who, by and through his attorney, moves this Court for an 

Order allowing counsel for the Defendant permission to in- 

spect and copy the following tangible objects in the posses- 

sion, custody or control of the State of Georgia, through its 

agent, the District Attorney of Fulton County, the existence 

of which is known, or by the exercise of due diligence may 

' become known, to the attorney aforementioned; and to order 

the production of information and items listed below pursuant 

to 0.C.G.A. Section 24-10-26 and Section 24-10-29. Defendant 

respectfully requests production of the following: 

1. 

A list of all witnesses who will be called by the State 

to testify. 

A amy sat 

FILED IN OFFICE 
BZ231 

| : oes anos Zoikd pe ¢ rrerpran AAURT 
\ sh... PR FR Sag) F, “ew 

  

{ 

DE [IE A RAN 

FULIN QOUNTY GECRGIA 

 



  

2. 

Any and all statements, confessions, or admissions 

allegedly made by this Defendant, whether written or oral, 

within the possession, custody or control of the State. This 

request includes statements made to witnesses other than 

police officers at any time that the Defendant was in cus- 

tody, as well as the precise words attributed to the Defen- 

dant. 

on 

Any and all criminal records of any witnesses whom the 

State intends to give testimony. 

4, 

All results or reports, and all notes or other recorda- 

tion of data of scientific tests and examinations arguably 

relevant to this case, including examinations of any prosecu- 

tion witnesses. This request seeks such information regard- 

less of whether or not the test results would be used by the 

State at trial. 

5. 

A list of the names, addresses and telephone numbers of 

all witnesses or other persons who have furnished information 

pertaining to these charges insofar as is known to the State, 

| whether or not they will be called as witnesses. 

a0 200 pice 210 

 



  

6. 

Any and all materials known to the State or which may 

become known, or which through due diligence may be learned 

from the investigating officers or the witnesses or the 

persons having knowledge of this case, which is exculpatory 

in nature or favorable to the accused or which may lead to 

exculpatory or favorable material or which might serve to 

mitigate punishment, including any evidence impeaching or 

contradicting testimony of State witnesses or instructions to 

State witnesses not to speak with or discuss the facts of 

this case with defense counsel. This request includes, but 

is not limited to, any consideration or promises made to, or 

for the benefit of, the State's witnesses including witness 

fees, transportation assistance, any animosity expressed by 

any witness towards the Defendant, and all information which 

could arguably create an interest or bias of the witness 

against the Defendant or act as an indictment to color their 

testimony; any information showing misconduct or bade acts by 

the witness. 

7. 

Any and all photographs, including Defendant's photo- 

graphs, viewed by witnesses for the purpose of identifying 

the Defendant. 

 



- —— a.     Con ly pt SE A DE as It ANC WR SAN mtn ag X hay a TE THC RE 

i 

i 
| 

| 

  

  

8. 

Any and all police incident reports prepared immediately 

after, or within a reasonable time after the incident which 

forms the basis of this indictment. 

9. 

Defendant states that the information requested above is 

within the exclusive control of the State and is essential to 

the Defendant's preparation for trial, as mandated by the Due 

Process Clause of the United States Constitution, and is 

otherwise material in the preparation of the trial, and is 

reasonably requested with no great administrative burden upon 

the State of Georgia. 

10. 

Defendant asks that the Court review the prosecution's 

file in camera regarding the foregoing items requested. The 

State has a duty to disclose to the Defendant evidence that 

is either exculpatory or material, non-cumulative and favor- 

able to his defense. This duty is derived from Due Process 

requirements and is an affirmative one. 

WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully prays that this Honor- 

able Court enter an Order granting the above-requested dis- 

covery, and reserving Defendant's right to supplement and 

aot 200 pr 2 (3 

   



  

amend his Motion as the disclosure of information provides 

further bases for relief. 

Respectfully submitted, 

How Op 
  

H, Pierre, Jr. 
Attorney for Sotaneny 

230 Peachtree Street, N.W. 
Suite 900 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 
404/524-0747 

  

 



  

| 
A 

i 
| 

| 

! 

STATE OF GEORGIA 

| 

| 
. THE STATE OF GEORGIA 

  

VS. CRIMINAL ACTION 

BEN WRIGHT, INDICTMENT NO. Z16064 

N
o
’
 

N
o
 
N
N
 
N
N
 

N
S
 

Defendant. 

  
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR DISCOVERY 

AND INSPECTION AND NOTICE TO PRODUCE 
  

Statement of the Case 
  

| The Defendant, Ben Wright, is a forty-seven (47) year   old Black male. He is charged with three (3) Counts of Armed   Robbery and one (1) Count of Theft by Receiving Stolen Pro- 

 perty. 

ARGUMENT AND CITATION OF AUTHORITY 
  

Pursuant to Brady v, Maryland, 373 8.5. 83 (19583), 
  

0.C.G.A. Section 17-7-210, Section 17-7-211, Section 24-10- 

  26, and Section 24-10-29, the Defendant is entitled to copies     
of the information sought to be produced in their motion. 

Due process requires that the requested information be pro- 

vided to the defense, sufficiently in advance of trial in 

jorder for counsel for Defendant to examine them and prepare 

their defense. 

  

  
| s00t 20UD pect 280 | 

 



    

    

    

Ws ve re ibs 0G TE Ml ~ w/in RE YORE RA 

CONCLUSION 
  

In order for the Defendant to adequately prepare his 

defense to the charges listed in the indictment, the Court is 

moved to order the State to produce certain documents and 

information germane to the defense and exclusively within the 

possession and control of the State. The production of the 

information requested can be accomplished with no great 

administrative burden upon the State of Georgia. Due Process 

requires that said documents be provided to the defense, 

sufficiently in advance of trial in order to Be: meaningful. 

Respectfully submitted, 

NC On, 
Pierre, Jr. 

bal for Seto, 

  

230 Peachtree Street, N.W. 

    

    
  

  

    

Suite 900 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 
404/524-0747 

BOOK 2505 PACE 281 

  

  

 



   BM~61AR MCA 10-21-89 
060521 
BM-47NA 
BM-17AR 
525292 

BPS: WITNESSES: 

C. W. Brown 

C. B. Fulse 

C. M. Long 
D. Belt 

V. Hudson 

R. L. Moman 

D. L. Depina 
T. L. Broiles 
M. J. Barrett 

R. Hall 

JRonathan Roper 
46 Orlando Dr. 

Atlanta, Ga. 30311 

Timothy Williams 
5514 Rock Rd. 

«Union City, Ga. 30291 

Shirley Robinson 
c/o C & S Bank 
562 Lee St. 

Effie Holmes 
2905 Springdale Rd. #U-7 
Atlanta, Ga. 30315 

Cynthia Starks 

6935 oOak Hill Circle 

Lot #61 
Austell, Ga. 30001 

Bryan Doby 
864 Arbor Hill Dr. 
Stone Mountain , Ga. 30088 

Beverly Stalls 

2495 0ld Hapeville Rd. 
College Park, Ga. 30349 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

QO 

= 
Rat. Christine Harper w 

ee 16064 Phyllis Philpot = 
Clerks No... Tr a a, ne c/o C & S Bank <n 

\ 0 Zt AL iis fi Rh 2358 Cascade Rd. S.W. - 
Tr y a2 

FULTON SUPERIOR COURT &3 

4 [Rie Huda. 

THE STATE ERE 50y of indictments, list of witnesses, 

vs. fii panel Adina arraignment and pleads. 

IIMMIE LEE STARKS, BEN. WRIGHT and Eric NOT OUILTY 
HOWARD J 

ARMED ROBBERY. (THREE COUNTS) - -and- - Car a 
THEFT BY RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY ~ District Attorney 

| T#eg. Bil {Irena A WA 
Y 728 of dANY ny 19 Po ~~ Defendants Gl 

: Xz pile LR hy 
va SE Gio... FD. & vel... Foreman p Dgfondant ( 

= AD 
\ A ce. a fs Q-mmie Lee Sheks Ben pright 

waives copy of indictment, list of witnesses, full waives copy of indictments, list of witnesses, 
panel, formal arraignment, and SL gr full panel, formal arraignment and pleads. 

. | Dist. Atty. Mot Guilty 

MT Deft's. Atty. ots R. 20.0. tows) 

Wo Deft. WG District Aftoxney 

Send  19fl ——te,, 
Defendant's Attorney 

WT Gul) Son Lust 4 
Defendant 

2s 15th day of Feb. 1949p 

 



   
vv} 

/ 
. . — 

STATE OF GEORGIA, COUNTY OF FULTON. 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAID COUNTY. 

THE GRAND JURORS selected, chosen and sworn for the County of Fulton, to-wit: 

W
O
N
 

H 
W
N
 

+
 

“
e
e
 

o
i
e
.
 

  

Cidju Emir, Foreman 14. 
Robert A. Greenway, Asst. Foreman 15. 
Wendy H. Green, Secretary 16. 

+ ‘Amanda B. Dodson, Asst. Secretary 17. 
Josephine J. Bandy 18. 
Sharon F. Bates 19. 
Linda J. Farris 20. 

.« Freddie P. Hall, Jr. 21. 
Dorothy S. Henderson bY 4 

. # 4 LI J HIGITCEE 23. 

. Anne B. Jackson 24. 
. David B. Johnson 25. 

Michael Garry Kimble 
Ronald G. Loden 

El el i LL 
Kathryn A. Mills 
Charles Pharms 

John J. Shields 
Minh Tan Tran 
Melissa A. Wambo 
Evelyn K. Wells 
Johnny H. Williams 

Al) 
  -— 1S 

in the name and behalf of the citizens of Georgia, charge and accuse 

JIMMIE LEE STARKS, BEN WRIGHT and ERIC HOWARD 

Jerry D. Wright, 1st. Alt. 
EA An thane 

  

with the offense of: — 

ARMED ROBBERY 
  

for that said accused, in the County of Fulton and State of Georgia, on the 

October 4th day of 
’ 

  
  

did unlawfully, with the intent to commit theft, take from the person 

and immediate presence of Phyllis Philpot the following property, to 

wit: a sum of money, of value, and the property of the said Phyllis 

Philpot, as bailee, by intimidation and by use of a pistol, the same 

being an offensive weapon; - 

contrary to the laws of said State, the good order, peace and dignity thereof. 

LEWIS R. SLATON, District Attorney 

Special Presentmeng.. #17 4 PASE 117 

19 89 
  

 



COUNT TWO 
  

  

: THE GRAND JURORS, selected, chosen and sworn for the County of Fulton aforesaid, in the name 
and behalf of the citizens of Georgia, charge and accuse 

JIMMIE LEE STARKS, BEN WRIGHT and ERIC HOWARD 
  

  

  

  

  

with the offense of ARMED ROBBERY 

for that the said accused person in the County aforesaid, on the 

5th day of October 19 89 
  

  

did unlawfully, with the intent to commit theft, take from the person 

and immediate presence of Shirley Robinson and Jonathan Roper the 

following property, to wit: $9,711.00 in money, of value, and the 

property of the said Shirley Robinson and Jonathan Roper, as bailees, 

by intimidation and by use of a pistol, the same being an offensive 

weapon; - 

contrary to the laws of said State, the good order, peace and dignity thereof. 

FULTON SUPERIOR COURT LEWIS R. SLATON, District Attorney 

Special Presentment 

rend 14m 418 
 



  

COUNT THREE 

  

  
  

THE GRAND JURORS, selected, chosen and sworn for the County of Fulton aforesaid, in the name 

and behalf of the citizens of Georgia, charge and accuse 

JIMMIE LEE STARKS, BEN WRIGHT and ERIC HOWARD 
  

  

  

  

  

with the offense of ARMED ROBBERY 

for that the said accused person in the County aforesaid, on the 

Sth day of October 19 80 
  

    

did unlawfully, with the intent to commit theft, take from the person 

and immediate presence of Timothy Williams the following property, to 

wit: one gold nugget ring with six diamonds, of value, and the 

property of the said Timothy Williams, by intimidation and by use of a 

pistol, the same being an offensive weapon; - 

contrary to the laws of said State, the good order, peace and dignity thereof. 

FULTON SUPERIOR COURT: LEWIS R. SLATON, District Attorney 

: Special Presentment 

ae  ex2114ma 410 
 



  

  

COUNT FOUR 
  

THE GRAND JURORS, selected, chosen and sworn for the County of Fulton aforesaid, in the name 

and behalf of the citizens of Georgia, charge and accuse 

JIMMIE LEE STARKS, BEN WRIGHT and ERIC HOWARD 
  

  

  

  

  

with the offense of THEFT BY RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY 

for that the said accused person in the County aforesaid, on the 

5th day of - October : 19 89 
    

  

did unlawfully receive and retain the following stolen property, to 

wit: one 1985 Oldsmobile Delta 88 automobile, a motor vehicle, the 

property of George Whitman, said motor vehicle having been stolen from 

the said George Whitman on October 3, 1989 and said accused should 

have known said property was stolen; said motor vehicle not having 

been received and retained by accused with intent to restore the same 

to its owner; - 

contrary to the laws of said State, the good order, peace and dignity thereof. 

FULTON SUPERIOR COURT LEWIS R. SLATON, District Attorney 

Special Presentment 

Se tay ix 21 14 mee 421 
 



  

STATE OF GEORGIA YOU MUST BE PRESENT AND MAY BE REPRE- 

  

FULTON COUNTY SENTED BY A LAWYER. IF YOU ARE FREE ON 
CALENDAR NOTICE APPEARANCE BOND AND FAIL TO APPEAR, YOUR 

. BOND WILL BE SUBJECT TO FORFEITURE AND A 
WARRANT MAY ISSUE FOR YOUR RE-ARREST.       STATEVS. WRIGHTs BEN 

  

INDICTMENT NO. 1160564 58 

: DEFENDANT IS REQUIRED TO 

THIS CASE IS SET UPON A (1) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (730-5242) YOUR 

TRIAL BONDS 240 1 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE OF ANY 

CALENDAR FOR MARCH Se 1990 
| IN NT | M ICATI T AWYER. IF AT 900AM . FULTON COUNTY COURTHOUSE, @ MANTA CONTINU NG COMMUNICATION WITH YOUR LAWYE 

BEFORE THE HONORABLE (3) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (730-5242) OF THE 
DON LANGHAM NAME OF YOUR LAWYER. 
JUDGE, FULTON SUPERIOR COURT, CRIMINAL (4) BE PRESENT WITH YOUR LAWYER AT THE TIME AND PLACE 

INDICATED ON THIS NOTICE: 
DIVISION 

(5) BE AWARE THAT FAILURE TO APPEAR WITH YOUR LAWYER ON THE 
THIS 26 DAYOF FEBRUARYs 1990 DATE SET MAY RESULT IN YOUR BEING FOUND IN CONTEMPT 

OF COURT: 
JUANITA HICKS (6) NOTIFY THE COURT IMMEDIATELY IF IT SHOULD APPEAR THAT UPON 

- CLERK OF SUPERIOR COURT - TRIAL OR ARRAIGNMENT YOU MAY NOT BE REPRESENTED BY 
ADDRESSEE: A LaWyze 

(7) BRING THIS NOTICE TO COURT ON THE REQUIRED DATE 
216064-D-1 

WRIGHT, BEN 
1881 LSKREOOF SBR 
ATLANTA, GA 30315 

A COPY OF THIS NOTICE IS PERMANENTLY RETAINED IN YOUR CASE FILE 

J 
A 

reli tL HG. PE wv NIT HARARE RL 

Y 

 



  

: g IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY 
5 STATE OF GEORGIA 

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE FORM 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

STATE OF GEORGIA 
  

  

  CASE No. Z [60 6Y 

  

V
t
 

N
s
 

a
l
 

w
t
?
 

a
t
 

n
t
 

a
t
t
 

“
w
u
d
 

“
u
i
t
 

  

Notice is provided pursuant to the Uniform Rules for the 
  

  

Superior Court, Section 4.2 of the entry in the above referenced 

action representing: ra nan 
oJ 

who is a EXILREIEL/ defendant in the above styled action. 

  

This ;S= day of Fel. 199 CO 

“FILED IN OFFICE d=. 4 
r 8 SIGNED _Preang 
, FEB | 61990 > 

(lis  SUPCRIO ; oe, TYPED NAME a any he 

Sn MAILING ADDRESS AD fl ee fi te Sd NTU 

ATT Sov 
Oecd a 305% 

TELEPHONE NO. __ 22% — CO 14 

    

  

  

  

      
  

  

  

  

  

  

\ 
i 

lis 
sick 2003 re: 225 

 



STATE OF GEORGIA 
FULTON COUNTY 
CALENDAR NOTICE 

  

sTATEvs. WRIGHTs BEN 

INDICTMENT NO. 216064 ts 

THIS CASE IS SET UPON A 
TRIAL 
CALENDAR FOR APRIL 99 1990 

AT 900AM FULTON COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 

BEFORE THE HONORABLE 
DON LANGHAM 

JUDGE, FULTON SUPERIOR COURT, CRIMINAL 

DIVISION : 
THIS 3 DAYOF APRILy 1990 

JUANITA HICKS 

CLERK OF SUPERIOR COURT 

ADDRESSEE: 

  

YOU MUST BE PRESENT AND MAY BE REPRE- 

SENTED BY A LAWYER. IF YOU ARE FREE ON 

APPEARANCE BOND AND FAIL TO APPEAR, YOUR 

BOND WILL BE SUBJECT TO FORFEITURE AND A 

WARRANT MAY ISSUE FOR YOUR RE-ARREST. 
    

DEFENDANT IS REQUIRED T0 

11) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (730-5242). YOUR 
BONDSMAN. AND THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE OF ANY 
CHANGE OF ADDRESS. 

2) MAINTAIN CONTINUING COMMUNICATION WITH YOUR LAWYER. IF 

YOU HAVE ONE: 

i3) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (730-5242) OF THE 
NAME OF YOUR LAWYER 

(4) BE PRESENT WITH YOUR LAWYER AT THE TIME AND PLACE 
INDICATED ON THIS NOTICE: 

(5) BE AWARE THAT FAILURE TO APPEAR WITH YOUR LAWYER ON THE 
DATE SET MAY RESULT IN YOUR BEING FOUND IN CONTEMPT 
OF COURT: 

(6) NOTIFY THE COURT IMMEDIATELY IF IT SHOULD APPEAR THAT UPON 
TRIAL OR ARRAIGNMENT YOU MAY NOT BE REPRESENTED BY 
A LAWYER. 

BRING THIS NOTICE TO COURT ON THE REQUIRED DATE. 

  

3 

  

WRIGHTy BEN 
1881 LSKREOCF S8K 

ATLANTA» GA 30315 

A COPY OF THIS NOTICE IS PERMANENTLY RETAINED IN YOUR CASE FILE 

STATE OF GEORGIA 
FULTON COUNTY 
CALENDAR NOTICE 

STATE VS. ntluiTsy Li 

INDICTMENT NO. cl0Jut 1il 

THIS CASE IS SET UPON A 
TRIAL 

CALENDAR FOR Ju..c 159 1970 

AT 9UUAM FULTON COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 
BEFORE THE HONORABLE 
DON LANGHAM 

JUDGE, FULTON SUPERIOR COURT, CRIMINAL 

DIVISION : 

THIS 39 pAYOF MAYs 199C 

JUANITA HICKS 
CLERK OF SUPERIOR COURT 

ADDRESSEE: 
216064-D-1 

KRIGHTy SEN 
1881 LSKREUCF 3581 
ATLANTAy GA 30315 

  

  

YOU MUST BE PRESENT AND MAY BE REPRE- 

SENTED BY A LAWYER. IF YOU ARE FREE ON 

APPEARANCE BOND AND FAIL TO APPEAR, YOUR 

BOND WILL BE SUBJECT TO FORFEITURE AND A 

WARRANT MAY ISSUE FOR YOUR RE-ARREST. 
  

DEFENDANT IS REQUIRED TO: 

(1) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (730-5242), YOUR 
BONDSMAN. AND THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE OF ANY 
CHANGE OF ADDRESS. 

MAINTAIN CONTINUING COMMUNICATION WITH YOUR LAWYER. IF 
YOU HAVE ONE: 

IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (730-5242) OF THE 
NAME OF YOUR LAWYER. 

BE PRESENT WITH YOUR LAWYER AT THE TIME AND PLACE 
INDICATED ON THIS NOTICE 

BE AWARE THAT FAILURE TO APPEAR WITH YOUR LAWYER ON THE 
DATE SET MAY RESULT IN YOUR BEING FOUND IN CONTEMPT 
OF COURT: 

NOTIFY THE COURT IMMEDIATELY IF IT SHOULD APPEAR THAT UPON 
TRIAL OR ARRAIGNMENT YOU MAY NOT BE REPRESENTED BY 
A LAWYER; 

(7) BRING THIS NOTICE TO COURT ON THE REQUIRED DATE 

  

(2 

{3 

“4 

5) 

(6 

A COPY OF THIS NOTICE IS PERMANENTLY RETAINED IN YOUR CASE FILE 

  

 



  

FINAL DISPOSITION SC-6 
  

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY FINAL DISPQSITION 

STATE OF GEORGIA 

VS. 

  

  

  

  

4 i ’ 

7 hx 0 JURY O VERDICT: O OTHER DISPOSITION 
IATED 

  
  

      

    

    

  

  

a O NON-JURY O GUILTY ON O NOLLE PROSEQUI ORDER ON 
$ UILTY ON COUNT(S) trl COUNT(S) aa) 
© O NOLO CONTENDERE O O NOT GUILTY ON EAD DOCKET SYDER ON 
s COUNT(S). COUNT(S) COUNT(S). r 
£ O TO LESSER INCLUDED O GUILTY OF INCLUDED (SEE SEPARATE ORDER) 

OFFENSE(S) OFFENSE(S) OF 
OI COUNT(S) ON COUNT(S) 
EFENDANT WAS ADVISED OF HIS/HER RIGHT TO-HAVE THIS SENTENCE REVIEWED BY THE SUPERIOR COURT'S SENTENCE REVIEW PANEL 

FELONY SENTENCE O MISDEMEANOR SENTENCE 

g WHEREAS, the above-named defendant has been found guilty of the bovs-stated offense. WHEREUPON, it is ordered and adjudged by the Coury that: Thy said defendant 

is barely spntenced to confinemept for a pgfiod of ~a Ald < I'L (0 JX = Nl» Zi a A 

(IAL hatin 1.0m 1]9/90 Fall O0linta £8nl Lies ad br CONC aM Lb 14) [2.1505 
in the State Penal System or such othgf stitution as th¢ Cofamissioner of the State Department of Corrections or Court may direct, to be computed as provided by law. 
HOWEVER, it is further ordered by fh Court 

O 1) THAT the above sentence may be served on probation 

O 2) THAT upon service of the above sentence, the remainder of may be served 

on probation PROVIDED that the said defendant complies with the following general and other conditions herein imposed by the Court as a part of this sentence. 

O 3) THAT the above sentence be suspended. 

    

  

O GENERAL CONDITIONS OF PROBATION 

The defendant, having been granted the privilege of serving all or part of the above-stated sentence on probation, hereby is sentenced to the following general conditions of 

probation: 

O 1) Do not violate the criminal laws of any governmental unit. 

DO 2) Avoid injurious and vicious habits - especially alcoholic intoxication and narcotics and other dangerous drugs uniess prescribed lawfully. 

O 3) Avoid persons or places of disreputable or harmful character. 

0 4) Report to the Probation-Parole Supervisor as directed and permit such Supervisor to vist him (her) at home or elsewhere. 

O 5) Work faithfully at suitable employment insofar as may be possible. 

O 6) Do not change his (her) place of abode, move outside the jurisdiction of the Court, or leave the State for any period of time without prior permission of the Probation 

Supervisor. 

O 7) Support his (her) legal dependants to the best of his (her) ability. 
O 8) Probationer shall, from time to time upon oral or written request by any Probation Officer, produce a breath, urine, and/or blood specimen for analysis for the possible 

presence of a substance prohibited or controlled by any law of the State of Georgia or of the United States. 

O OTHER CONDITIONS OF PROBATION 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant pay a fine in the amount of $ plus $50 or 10%, whichever is less pursuant to O.C.G.A. 15-21-70 plus 10% of 

the original fine pursuant to O.C.G.A. 15-21-90 and pay restitution inthe amountof § Probation Fee$ _________ and Court Costs § 

19
. 

2
2
)
 

  

  

  

  

  

=)     
IT IS THE FURTHER ORDER of the Court, and the defendant is hereby advised that the Court may, at any time, revoke any conditions of this probation and/or discharge 

the defendant from probation. The probationer shall be subject to arrest for violation of any condition of probation herein granted. If such probation is revoked, the Court 

may order the execution of the sentence which was originally imp i or any portion thereof in the manner provided by law after dedycting therefrom the amount of time     

      

the defendant has served on probation. 

  The defendant was represented by the Honorable : : iy Law (Employment) (Appointment). 

So ordered this v5 ay of 2 19 20 Zz al “7 oes 
Court Reporter: ~~ hietd 7 Judge, Fulton Superior Court 

    

  

i
 

p
t
 

d
i
e
l
 

da
y 

of
 

    
    

    

2 ( 
~ 

8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
= 
Io) This is to certify that a true and correct copy of this Sentence of Probation has been delivered in person to the defendant and he/she instructed regarding the conditions 

.£ as set forth above. 

3 
& This day of 19 —— A 

Probation Officer 

Copy received and instructions regarding conditions acknowledge. 

[3 A
a
 

This day of 19   fn ® B 

rosy 8 1 1 & page & 72 probationer 

i) 
&
 

hite - Clerk Goldenrod - Defendant - Pink - Probation Offic        

  

     



  

| 
+ 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY 

THE STATE OF GEORGIA 

THE STATE OF GEORGIA * 

vs. * 

BEN WRIGHT, JR. * INDICTMENT NO. Z-16064 

NOTICE OF PROSECUTION'S INTENT TO 
  

PRESENT EVIDENCE OF SIMILAR TRANSACTIONS 
  

Comes now, the State of Georgia, by and through the 

District Attorney, and hereby provides notice of its intent to 

present evidence of similar transactions on the trial of the 

above-styled case in accordance with Georgia Uniform Court Rule: 

No. 31.3, showing this Court the following: | 

1. 

A copy of this Notice has been served upon defendant's 

counsel at least ten days prior to trial in accordance with 

rule 31.1, as reflected by the Certificate of Service attached 

hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 

2. 

FILED IN CFFICE Copies of the following documents pertaining to the 

imilar Transaction(s) are attached: The Indictment/accu-~ : . UNOS 1990 
770 Uo on. Plea, and Sentence. 

FULTON COUNTY GEORGIA 300k 20 [1 ore 8 dh 

AN) ~ 

 



  

  
  

  

  

— a ———— i. i. i lA. 3. Lo easel WE aWL Cafe - a RW 

3. 

Pursuant to Rule 31.3(B) the similar transactions are as 

follows: 

Indictment: 2Z-18052 
Offense: Armed Robbery 
Date of Offense: January 1990 
County of Offense: Fulton 
Disposition: Pendine Jeers, Conic on 

Indictment: A-40553 
Offense: Voluntary Manslaughter, Armed Robbery (2 cts) 
Date of Offense: May 13, 1978 
County of Offense: Fulton 
Disposition: Plea of guilty 

Indictment: A-42821 
Offense: Armed Robbery (2 cts) 
Date of Offense: April 1, 1978 
County of Offense: Fulton 
Disposition: Plea of guilty 

  

4, | 

Should a conviction be obtained in the instant case, the 

foregoing similar transaction(s) will be used in aggravation of 

punishment. Further, the State's List of Witnesses is hereby 

amended to include the names of all of the persons listed on 

the attached documents. 

00020 71 5206857 | 

4) 
 



rte. ———— mia -- JE a Te Rh IE 

  

WHEREFORE, the State requests leave of the Court to 

present evidence of said similar transactions in the trial of 

the above-styled case and that a hearing be held on this 

request at the call of the case for trial or at such other time: 

the Court deems appropriate. 

Respectfully itted,    

    

  

  -_ 

Assista#ft District Attorney | 
Atlanta Judicial Circuit | 

Third Floor Courthouse | 
136 Pryor Street, S.W. 

Atlanta, Georgia 30335 
    (404) 730-4973 

    

  

| Bok 29 71 10858 

 



  

  

  

— - i a be ————— —— aot ee $n = + a hs | mn pn men. Son i TE CARAT EN, NTN SAE ANRC SARA WN NRA BART Ry 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
  

I hereby certify that I have served a copy of the within 

and foregoing Notice of Prosecution's Intent to Present 

Evidence of Similar Transactions upon the Attorney of Record 

for defendant by depositing a copy of same in the United States 

mail in a properly addressed envelope with adequate postage 

affixed thereon to insure prompt delivery to the following: 

H. Pierre, Jr. 
230 Peachtree Street, N.E. 
Suite 1000 
Atlanta, GA 30303 

  

This Sb, day of Marcie , 1990. 

‘ 

\ 
\ 

\ Fey   

  

  PATSY Y.| 
Assistant District Attorney 
Atlanta Judicial Circuit 

Third Floor Courthouse 

136 Pryor Street, S.W. 
Atlanta, Georgia 30335 
(404) 730-4973 

  

  

{ 

802 71 210856 

 



   
  

  

Sin- : hy p 3 
pmn=-31 dA AAR § (i LA] 

WITNESSES: Clerk's 8 na LEE HS OR I Rn Cer 

Paul Ross 

c/o Red Star Supermarket FULTON SUPERIOR COUR] 

1025 iidgewood Ave 

THE STATE 

vs. 

Dorothy Umberger 
401 Leke Creek Dr. 
Round Rock, Texas 

James Cole 
: 

CoG COUNTS) 
c/o Red Star Super- 

market 
rites 

1025 Edgewood Ave Len Bl 

(KL 
7 day of vas Clie Bolt sis . 19.75. 

Patricia Jackson iii oa... / J 

43% Techaood Pod La rd, ZL otemen 

Ful. 

BPC: 

dh 

Co. DA: 

Grady Eskew ju ois: ; : 
waises—copy—ol indictment, list of—witmesse?, Tull panel, 

I. 

  

formal-aseaigament—end pleads. ..... he 

Det. C. E. Simmons... / J 

Det. J. A. Walker 
Jr Fa ie aR 

Det. MW. Harris 0. 

  
S6
0 

4 
Dy
 

I 
re
 

30
0k
 

29 
7 

   



IN THE SUPERIOR C. RT OF SAID COUNTY. 

  

THE GRAND JURORS selected, chosen and sworn for the County of Fulton, to-wit: 

  
; 1. HAINES H. HARGRETT, Foreman TET SRE Dred lhlC 

2. JAMES F. HOLLINGSWORTH, Asst. Foreman 15. GLENN P. OAKS 
3. RUBY T. HAMILTON, Secretary 16. THOMAS N, PULLEN 
4. SARAH BUTLER, Asst. Secretary 17. DUDLEY B. SAMFORD 
5. JERRY ADAMS 18. PAUL M, SCHUMACHER 
6. LORETTA G. BARNES 19. CHARLES CARDEN SNOW 
7. ANGIE BEASLEY 20. JOHN F. WALSH 
8. MARIE BENSON 21. KATHARINE W. WHISNANT 
9. GRADY L. BILLINGSLEA 22. JACKIE WILKIE 
10. RALEIGH M. BIRD 23. FE. BRADY WILSON 
11. AUSTIN VW. DANIEL 24. MARY DAVIS JENNINGS (lst Alt.) 
12. DOROTHY M. HOWELL EEE sagan at 0 SEL SINE 
13. BOBBY L. JONES 

  

in tha name and hehalf of the citizens of Georaia. charae and accuse 

Lg 

BEN WRIGHT, JR. 

with the offense of ARMED ROCLZERY, for thet seid sccused, in tic Councy 
ol Fulton, Steis of Gecrise, on the 1s: dry of axxil, 1873 

did unlawfully, with the intent to commit theft, take {rem the nercson ai 

immediete presence ¢f Fzul Ross the following procertiy, to wit: cne 

thousand end thirisen €-llers ($1,012.00) in cesh meney of the velue 

one thousend end thirteen dollers ($1,(13.({) and the property of 

Paul Ross, es beilee and cne man's welle:z, thirty dollers ($30.C0) 

in cash money znd one .23 celiber Rossi pistol ell of the value of 

one hundred and fifteen dollers ($112.C() and the grooserty of Pzul 

Ross by intimidetion and by use of 2 nistol the same teing en 

offensive weapon;- contrery tc the lews of said Stete, the good order, 

oo 

neace and dignity thereoZ. "“TBOOK Bi LT 

COUNT TWO - Ta 
pope 20 (1 ash 

And the Grand Jurors eforeseid, on thelr oeths eforessid, in the 
name and behalf of the citizens of Georgia, further charge and accuse 

  

BEN WRIGHT, JR. 

with the offense of ARMED ROBBERY, for that said accused, in the County 
of Fulton, State of Georgia, on the lst day of April, 1978 

did unlawfully, with the intent to commit theft, take from the person 

end immediate presence of Dorothy Umberger the following property, 

to wit: fifty-nine dollars ($£9.0C) in cesh money and one ladies 

pocketbook all of the value of sixty-three dollers ($63.0C) and the 

property of Dorothy Umberger by intimidation end by use of & pistol 

the same being an offensive weapon;- contrary to the lzws of said 

State, the good order, peace and dignity thereof. 

  

Specicl Presentment. 

 



  

FELONY SENTENCE 
charge Lt ened Ladlioies ETT) 
Fulton Superior Court 

_ rues tem 19577 

No.22- HE 2/ 

THE STATE (Plea) (Vestdigt) of Guilty v= 

WHEREUPON, It is ordered and adjudged by the Court that the Defendant, 

etry 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

be taken from the Bar of this Court to the Jail of Fulton County, and be there safely kept until 

a sufficient guard is sent for him from the Georgia Penitentiary, and be then delivered to, and be 

by said guard taken to said Penitentiary, or to such other place as the Director of Corrections 

may direct, where he, the said defendant be confined at labor for the full term of 

ZA CF 
(LacenZs £ ZO Z years to be computed according to law. 

rn? & ; ZZ 

Aral. A AOI 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

The costs of these proceedings are taxed against the defendant. 

  

District Attorney 

  

  

FILED IN THIS OFFICE. THIS 

  

/) 

ng EN Ha ard dne JAN 1G io 

Su il Foes, 
  

Deputy Clerk, S.C., AJC 

0x20 71 5-862 

COURT REPORTER: EIT A een 

 



   
   

bm-43.-ar REC v-; (O 

WITNESSES: 
bm-31-ar REC 6-7-78 
bm-36 NA 

Ronald W. Dukes 
%Dixie Furniture 

993 Marietta St NW 

George A. Malcom 
Same 

Mary Dorsey Jenkins 

Patricia Jackson 

BPS: 
Det. W. K. Jowers 
Det. J. A. Walker, Jr. 
Det. W. Harris 

1eal7t 

  

  

FULTON SUPERIOR COURT 

THE STATE 

vs. 
DAVID BURNEY, JR. 
BERNARD DEPREE 

Sh 

jo i a Nii a ye 8 

Ce ok 

waives-eopy-of-indictment, list of witnessesr+ull-panch- 

formal-arcaigament,—and pleads... MN:r Go tf bate ER A a ye: 

vain i A arse CR +) Atty. 

  

   

  

\Werr—pmn MM “Clesk y JURY x i Jo : i, 

waives ¢ i ents, lisf of witness ; : 

fu Ara and pl 5 tr rom De parm or 

Mo £ Geills i 

foes A. 22068) 

Defendant's Attorney 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

AP)    
  FR Asi pay 77 N 4 Al 

iw Defendant 0 

    

i "Defendant's 

  

  

  

sll & non 

i a pin Go A H(z) Ly 

Ys 

TA Nn Gl lye 

Kk Eno WRieHY Ja 
waives-copy -of-indictments, fist of witnesses, 

tut -panel, formal arraignment and pleads. 

SN Mat. Gerth 

2, 

  

  

    

    

  

ara rt’ 2/8/>F ~ 7m 2, 

Q Defendant's Attorney 

Defeddant 
  

 



STATE OF GEORGIA, COUNTY OF FULTON. 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAID COUNTY. 

| THE GRAND JURORS selected, chosen and sworn for the County of Fulton, to-wit: 

i 

13. JOE H. GERSON 
  

< rel roreman 14 
2. CAROL B. BROWN, Asst. Foreman : HUNT 
z MARTHA NELL ALLVAN, Secretary i ba K RE 

. RICHARD H, LOVELACE, Asst. Secty. 17. MARY A. MORRIS 
2 Ana. Js AN 3 . E.C. SCHIFFGENS 

. FRANK C, BRANDES 3: NERY Saw 
§: MARY JO BROCK 29. SRA, SAVES an 
25 ans BAS CHIVZRS 22. ERMA—CECIL—WARERS 

. GUS L. CONNZLLY > 
11. BLANCHE L. DOBBS er LD Wie 
12. CHARLOTTE GAINZS ALT. W. DANIEL EBERSOLE 

      

in the name and behalf of the citizens of Georgia, charge and accuse 

DAVID BURNEY, JR., BERNARD DEPREE alias Bernard Dupree 
WARREN McCLESKY, BEN WRIGHT, JR. 

with the offense of MURDER, for that sald accused, in the County of 
Fulton, State of Georgia, on the 13th day of May, 1978 

did unlawfully and with malice aforethought, cause the death of 

Frank Robert Schlatt, a human being, by shooting him with a pistol; - 

contrary to the laws of sald State, the good order, peace and dignity 

thereof. iw, 

. : COUNT TWO 

And the Grand Jurors aforesaid, on their oaths aforesaid, in ‘the 
name and behalf of the citizens of Georgia, further charge and accuse 

DAVID BURNEY, JR., BERNARD DEPREE alias Bernard Dupree 
WARREN ’McCLESKY, BEN WRIGHT, JR. 

with the offense of ARMED ROBBERY, for that said accused, in the County 
of Fulton, State of Georgia, on the 13th day of May, 1978 

did unlawfully, with the intent to commit theft, take from the person 

and immediate presence of Ronald Warren Dukes the following property, 

to wit: one thousand, five hundred dollars in money ($1,500.00) of 

the value of $1,500.00 and the property of Ronald Warren Dukes, as 

bailee and six dollars in money ($6.00) and one man's Timex wrist watch 

all of the value of $56.00 and the property of Ronald Warren Dukes, 

her intdmiAat+ian and her moa AP a Nnia+aTl and a Ahad ~ an lan mama Rad m~   
poor 2D 71 sac SO4  



  

  

COUNT THREE 

And the Grand Jurors aforesaid, on their oaths aforesaid, in the 
name and behalf of the citizens of Georgia, further charge and accuse 

DAVID BURNEY, JR., BERNARD DEPREE alias Bernard Dupree 
WARREN McCLESKY, BEN WRIGHT, JR. 

with the offense of ARMED ROBBERY, for that sald accused, in the County 
of rulton, State of Georgia, on the 13th day of May, 1978 

did unlawfully, with the intent to commit theft, take from the person 

and immediate presence of George A. Malcom, the following property, 

to wit: one Garcia .380 Automatic pistol of the value in excess of 

$100.00 and the property of George A. Malcom by intimidation and by use 

of a pistol and a: shotgun, the same being offensive weapons; =- contrary 

to the laws of said State, the good order, peace and dignity thereof. 

BCS JU PAE 

LEWIS R. SLATON, District Attorney 
Special Presentment. 

0002371 p2:565 

 



  

FELONY SENTENCE 

Charge Senden, (ime) Ladle (227) 

Fulton Superior Cop 

dl 5 Term, 19.19 
7 

  

  

  

No. B05 52 

THE STATE (Plea) (Verdict) of Guilty <a % 

WHEREUPON, It is ordered and adjudged by the Court that the Defendant, 

  

  

  

  

  

be taken from the Bar of this Court to the Jail of Fulton County, and be there safely kept until 

a sufficient guard is sent for him from the Georgia Penitentiary, and be then delivered to, and be 

by said guard taken to said Penitentiary, or to such other place as the Director of Corrections 

may direct, where he, the said defendant be confined at labor for the full term of 

Wri in ZL £20) years to be computed according to law. 

Chad Lo tind CAA LNA LAT 

  

  

  

  

1 
. \ ¢ 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

The costs of these proceedings are taxed against the defendant. 

  

District Attorney 

  

prise A Ll lra 

  

FILED IN THIS OFFICE. THIS 

  
THE 0 91229 
a -     Sk Jan 101979 

Deputy Clerk, S.C., AJ.C. £ Be Bonk 5 1 orn ROD 
a Pare NT) 

COURT SFA 

 



  

[=
 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY 
STATE OF GEORGIA 

STATE OF GEORGIA 
VS. 

BEN WRIGHT 
CRIMINAL ACTION 
FILE NO. Z-16064 

N
r
 
r
r
 

TRANSCRIPT OF PLEA PROCEEDINGS, HEARD BEFORE 
THE HONORABLE DON A. LANGHAM, COMMENCING ON THE 15TH DAY OF 
JUNE, 1990, ATLANTA, GEORGIA. 

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL: 

ON BEHALF OF THE STATE: JOSEPH F. BURFORD 
ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY 

ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT: H. PIERRE, JR. 

ATTORNEY AT LAW 

EVELYN PARKER 
OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER 
FULTON SUPERIOR COURT 

ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 
CERTIFICATE NO. B-772 

   



  

wn
 

BEN WRIGHT, 

HAVING BEEN FIRST DULY SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AND TESTIFIED AS 

FOLLOWS: 

DIRECT EXAMINATION 

BY MR. BURFORD: 

Q. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE COURT. 

A. MY NAME THE BEN WRIGHT, JR. 

Q. IS THAT YOUR TRUE AND GIVEN NAME? 

A. YES, IT Is. 

Q. ARE YOU THE BEN WRIGHT THAT IS LISTED IN BILL 

OF INDICTMENT 2-160647 

A. YES, I AM. 

MR. BURFORD: MR. PIERRE, YOU WAIVE ANY DEFECT 

IN THE INDICTMENT? 

MR. PIERRE: YES, WE DO. 

Q. YOU ARE CHARGED IN THIS BILL OF INDICTMENT WITH 

THREE COUNTS OF ARMED ROBBERY AND ONE COUNT OF THEFT BY 

RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY. ARMED ROBBERY CARRIES A POTENTIAL 

SENTENCE OF LIFE. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? 

A. YES, I DO. 

Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THEFT BY RECEIVING 

STOLEN PROPERTY ONLY CARRIES A POTENTIAL SENTENCE OF 1 TO 20 

YEARS? 

A. YES, I DO. 

Q. IS THIS YOUR LAWYER STANDING BEHIND YOU, MR. H. 

37 

  

 



  

PIERRE? 

A. YES, IT Is. 

Q. HAS HE BEEN OVER THIS BILL OF INDICTMENT WITH 

YOU THOROUGHLY AND COMPLETELY? 

A. YES, HE HAS. 

e. ARE YOU'RE SATISFIED WITH HIS REPRESENTATION OF 

YOU? 

A. YES, I AM. 

Q. MR. WRIGHT, YOU HAVE CERTAIN CONSTITUTIONAL 

RIGHTS. AMONG THOSE RIGHTS ARE THE RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY. 

AT THAT TRIAL BY JURY, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT OR 

YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO TESTIFY IN YOUR OWN BEHALF. THE CHOICE 

TO TESTIFY OR TO REMAIN SILENT IS YOURS AND YOURS ALONE. 

WHETHER YOU TESTIFY OR WHETHER YOU REMAIN SILENT, THE 

PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE WOULD FOLLOW YOU THROUGHOUT THE 

TRIAL. 

YOU WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO THE ASSISTANCE OF 

AN ATTORNEY. IF YOU COULD NOT AFFORD AN ATTORNEY, ONE WOULD 

BE APPOINTED FOR YOU BY THE COURT, BOTH FOR THE TRIAL OR ANY 

SUBSEQUENT PLEA THEREAFTER. I AM SORRY. APPEAL THEREAFTER. 

YOU WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO SUBPOENA AND BRING 

INTO COURT WITNESSES TO TESTIFY IN YOUR BEHALF. YOU WOULD 

HAVE THE RIGHT TO CROSS-EXAMINE ALL WITNESSES CALLED AGAINST 

YOU BY THE STATE. IF FOUND GUILTY BY TRIAL BY JURY, YOU 

WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL THE GUILTY VERDICT. DO YOU 

38 

  

 



  

UNDERSTAND THESE RIGHTS? 

A. I DO. 

Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR ATTORNEY HAS 

ENTERED INTO A NEGOTIATION WITH THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S 

OFFICE, AND THAT OUR RECOMMENDATION ON THIS BILL OF 

INDICTMENT WILL BE 12 YEARS TO SERVE ON THE THREE COUNTS OF 

ARMED ROBBERY, EACH TO RUN CONCURRENT WITH THE OTHER. THAT 

THE COUNT OF THEFT BY RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY WILL BE DEAD 

DOCKETED. THAT JUDGE LANGHAM DOES NOT HAVE TO FOLLOW THAT 

RECOMMENDATION AND COULD SENTENCE YOU UP TO THREE LIFE 

SENTENCES PLUS 20 YEARS. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? 

A. YES, SIR. 

Q. ANYBODY OFFERED YOU ANYTHING TO PLEAD GUILTY 

HERE TODAY? 

A. NO, THEY HAVEN'T. 

0. ANYBODY THREATENED YOU TO PLEAD GUILTY HERE 

TODAY? 

A. NO. 

Q. ARE YOU PRESENTLY UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY 

DRUGS OR ALCOHOL? 

A. NO, SIR. I AM NOT. 

Q. UNDER ANY MEDICATION? 

A. NO. I AM NOT. 

Q. TO THE CHARGE, THE THREE CHARGES OF ARMED 

ROBBERY IN BILL OF INDICTMENT Z-16064, HOW DO YOU PLEAD? 

39 

  

 



  

A. I PLEAD GUILTY. 

Q. IS THIS PLEA ENTERED FREELY AND VOLUNTARILY ON 

YOUR PART? 

A. YES, SIR. 

MR. BURFORD: YOUR HONOR, PLEA HAS BEEN ENTERED 

BY THE DEFENDANT AND SIGNED BY THE DEFENDANT AND THE 

DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY. 

THE COURT: HEAR THE FACTS. 

MR. BURFORD: YES, YOUR HONOR. ON THE 4TH DAY 

OF OCTOBER, 1989, THE C&S BANK AT 2358 CASCADE ROAD, THAT IS, 

BEING IN FULTON COUNTY, A ARMED ROBBERY WAS ATTEMPTED AT THAT 

BANK. THE MONEY WAS ACTUALLY REMOVED FROM THE BANK, BUT THE 

PERPETRATORS OF THE ROBBERY DROPPED THE MONEY WHEN THE BOMB 

WENT OFF, THE DYE BOMB. 

ON THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1989, AT THE C&S 

BANK AT 562 LEE STREET, A SECOND ARMED ROBBERY OCCURRED BY 

THREE INDIVIDUALS. THOSE INDIVIDUALS FLED THE BANK UPON 

ROBBING THE BANK, AND AN INDIVIDUAL IN THE BANK LEFT A PIECE 

OF GOLD JEWELRY. THAT EVIDENCE LED TO THE CATCHING OF THREE 

INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE ACTUALLY IN THE BANK. JIMMY LEE STARKS, 

ERIC HOWARD, AND A THIRD PARTY WHO WAS A JUVENILE. 

SUBSEQUENT INVESTIGATION AND STATEMENTS MADE BY 

ALL PARTIES SHOWED THAT MR. BEN WRIGHT WAS THE INSTIGATOR AND 

THE PLANNER OF THOSE TWO ROBBERIES. HE WAS SUBSEQUENTLY 

CHARGED AND ARRESTED AND BROUGHT HERE TODAY. 

40 

 



  

24 

25 

  

INASMUCH AS HE WAS PHYSICALLY NOT IN THE BANK 

AT THE TIME. THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S 

OFFICE ON THIS NEGOTIATED PLEA IS 12 YEARS TO SERVE ON ALL 

THREE COUNTS OF THE ARMED ROBBERY. THAT THE DEAD DOCKET ON 

THE THEFT BY RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY. THAT THE THREE 

COUNTS RUN CONCURRENT. 

THE COURT: MR. PIERRE. 

MR. PIERRE: YOUR HONOR, WE ARE ENTERING THIS 

PLEA FOR WANT OF A BETTER DESIGNATION OF IT. WE ASK THAT IT 

BE VIEWED AS A SPECIAL PLEA. THAT IS, THE COURT IS AWARE 

APPROXIMATELY THREE WEEKS AGO MR. WRIGHT WAS FOUND GUILTY BY 

A JURY OF A SEPARATE ARMED ROBBERY, AND THIS COURT SENTENCED 

HIM TO LIFE IN PRISON. I HAD SPOKEN WITH MR. SMEGAL, WHO 

INITIALLY WAS HANDLING THIS CASE, AND I THINK THE EVIDENCE 

WILL SUPPORT THE FACT THAT -- RATHER, THE RECORD WILL SUPPORT 

THE FACT THAT THE ONLY EVIDENCE THAT WAS AGAINST MR. WRIGHT 

ARE THE STATEMENTS OR A STATEMENT BY ONE OF THE 

CO-DEFENDANTS. ABSENT THAT, HE WAS NEVER THERE, AND OUR 

POSITION IS IF THIS CASE WERE TO GO TO TRIAL, I THINK HE 

WOULD PREVAIL. 

AS HIS ATTORNEY, I HAVE ADVISED HIM ON THE 

RAMIFICATIONS OF RISK OF RUNNING, THAT IT WOULD BE RUNNING 

AND HAVING AN ADDITIONAL TRIAL. THAT IS, IF HE WERE FOUND 

GUILTY, HE WOULD BE SUBJECTING HIMSELF TO THREE ADDITIONAL 

LIFE TERMS. 

41 

 



  

WE THINK AND MR. RIGHT THINKS THAT IT IS IN HIS 

BEST INTEREST TO ENTER THIS SPECIAL PLEA. HE WOULD ASK THAT 

THE COURT, IF IT ACCEPTS THE PLEA, WOULD HAVE THIS SENTENCE 

TO RUN CONCURRENT WITH THE LIFE SENTENCE THAT HE WAS ALREADY 

GIVEN. 

THE COURT: MR. WRIGHT, ANYTHING YOU WANT TO 

SAY? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. I APPRECIATE IT IF 

YOU WOULD ACCEPT MY PLEA AND -- 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT, SIR. I WILL ACCEPT THE 

PLEA. I BELIEVE IT'S FREELY, VOLUNTARILY, AND INTELLIGENTLY 

MADE. I BELIEVE THERE IS A SUFFICIENT FACTUAL BASIS FOR IT. 

I WILL ACCEPT THE PLEA RECOMMENDATION. HAVE YOU BEEN IN JAIL 

SINCE OCTOBER THE -- HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN IN JAIL? 

THE DEFENDANT: SINCE JANUARY 9TH. 

THE COURT: I WILL ACCEPT THE PLEA 

RECOMMENDATION ON EACH OF THE THREE COUNTS OF ARMED ROBBERY. 

I WILL SENTENCE MR. WRIGHT TO 12 YEARS TO SERVE TO BE 

CALCULATED FROM JANUARY 9, 1990. THIS SENTENCE TO RUN 

CONCURRENT WITH THE ARMED ROBBERY SENTENCE THAT I IMPOSED ON 

MR. WRIGHT WITHIN THE LAST FEW WEEKS, AND COUNT FOUR OF THIS 

INDICTMENT IS ON THE DEAD DOCKET. 

42 

  

  

 



  

»
 

an
 

uv
 

ee VRRNAAM TE CR Fv TI OF ERR AAT 2 ENR A a TY 

CERTIFICATE 

STATE OF GBORGIKS *.  @sugiiusif. 

  

COUNTY OF FULTON: 

I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING PAGES 
REPRESENT A TRUE, COMPLETE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE TRANSCRIPT 
FROM THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CASE AFORESAID. 

THIS CERTIFICATION IS EXPRESSLY WITHDRAWN AND 
DENIED UPON DISASSEMBLY OR PHOTOCOPYING OF THE FOREGOING 
TRANSCRIPT, OR ANY PART THEREOF, INCLUDING EXHIBITS, UNLESS 
SAID DISASSEMBLY OR PHOTOCOPYING IS DONE BY THE UNDERSIGNED 
OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER AND ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL IS 
ATTACHED THERETO. - 

THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 1991. 

     EVELYN RARKER, CCR-B-772 
OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER 
ATLANTA JUDICIAL CIRCUIT 

43 

 



. STATE OF GEORGIA 

COUNTY OF FULTON 

1 Valerie Wright, Deputy Clerk of 

the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia, do hereby certify 

that the within and foregoing is a true and correct copy of   . Motion For Discovery and Inspection (Filed February 23, 1990) 
: Indictment : 

1 
2 

3. Calendar Notice 

4, Final Disposition 
5 
6 

. Notice Of Prosecution's (Filed June 5, 1990) 

. Transcript Of Plea 

- all of which appears of file and record in this Office. 

Given under my hand and seal of Office. 

This the 26th ‘day of April 1991 

lira UA °F ik 
~ DEPUTY CLERK, Li COURT 
FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA 

     



  

  
  
  

! 

| 
eo) 

’ 

| 

| 
i} 
4 IRs 

e
n
 
—
—
—
—
—
—
 

  

[STATE OF GEORGIA 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY 

STATE OF GEORGIA 

INDICTMENT NO. A-99174 

CHARGE: V.G.C.S.A. 
BEN WRIGHT 

Proceedings before HONORABLE LUTHER ALVERSON 

on August 5, 1988 at Atlanta, Georgia. 

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL: 

FOR THE STATE: DAVID WRIGHT, 
Assistant District Attorney 

FOR THE DEFENDANT: CHARLES BOYLE, 
Attorney at law 

- v 
© wnat 

. 

Mary R. McLelland cep131989 
Official Court Reporter, A-257 
207 Fulton County Courthouse 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 {ERY SU 

  

    ULTON COUNTY ©- 

 



  

) 

DAVIS, MR. 

MR. WRIGHT: 

MR. WRIGHT: 

STATE VERSUS KEVIN IL.. THOMAS. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

BEN WRIGHT, GREGORY BRACEY, SAMUEL 

HOWARD, NUMBER THIRTY-TWO. 

THE 

MR. 

TEE 

MR. 

THE 

MR. 

THE 

MR. 

THE 

MR. 

SAMUEL GRAY. 

HONOR. 

THE 

MR. 

THE 

MR. 

FORTY-EIGHT. 

FORTY-NINE. 

THE 

MR. 

THE 

COURT: 

WRIGHT: 

CCURT: 

WRIGHT: 

COURT: 

WRIGHT: 

COURT. 

WRIGHT: 

COURT: 

WRIGHT: 

COURT: 

WRIGHT: 

COURT: 

WRIGHT: 

COURT: 

WRIGHT: 

COURT: 

THAT'S NUMBER FOUR. 

GEORGE TERRELL. 

THAT'S NUMBER FIVE. 

ROBERT LEE HIGH, NUMBER THIRTY-EIGHT. 

NUMBER SIX. 

NUMBER FORTY, CHAUNCEY MCCOY. 

NUMBER SEVEN. 

NUMBER FORTY-TWO, WILLIE TUCKER. 

THAT'S NUMBER EIGHT. 

AND THE NEXT ONE IS NUMBER FORTY-FIVE, 

THAT'S NUMBER NINE. 

MS. TARVER, NUMBER FORTY-SIX, YOUR 

THAT'S NUMBER TEN. 

AND RICO ANTONIO BYNUM, NUMBER 

NUMBER ELEVEN. 

JESSIE JAMES WILLIAMS, NUMBER 

NUMBER TWELVE. 

 



  

2 

MR. WRIGHT: JEFFREY KIRKLAND, NUMBER FIFTY-ONE AND 

FIFTY TRO. 

THE COURT: NUMBER THIRTEEN AND FOURTEEN.   
(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: NUMBER FIFTY-SEVEN, FLOYD ZILLAMON. 

THE COURT: NUMBER FIFTEEN. 

MR. WRIGHT:. THAT'S IT, YOUR HONOR, EXCEPT MR. 

THOMAS, WE'RE GOING FIRST. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

THE COURT: ARE YOU THE KEVIN I... THOMAS THAT'S NAMED 

IN INDICTMENT 98483 CHARGING YOU WITH THE OFFENSE OF MURDER? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES. 

THE COURT: AND ARE YOU THE BEN WRIGHT THAT'S NAMED 

IN INDICTMENT 99174 CHARGING YOU WITH VIOLATION GEORGIA 

CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

THE COURT: YOU'RE MR. WRIGHT, AREN'T YOU? 

THE DEFENDANT: I CAN'T HEAR TOO GOOD, YOUR HONOR. 

I DIDN'T HEAR YOU. 

THE COURT: ARE YOU THE BEN WRIGHT THAT'S NAMED IN 

INDICTMENT 99174 CHARGING YOU WITH VIOLATION GEORGIA CONTROLLED 

SUBSTANCES ACT? ARE YOU THAT PERSON? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 

 



  

4 

< 

no
 

wv
 

P
e
 

I
 

ARE YOU THE GREGORY LAMAR BRACEY NAMED IN INDICTMENT 

99613 CHARGING YOU WITH VIOLATION GEORGIA CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES 

ACT? 

THE DEPENDANT: VES. 

THE COURT: : AND ARE YOU THE SAMUEL DAVIS THAT'S 

NAMED IN INDICTMENT 99723 CHARGING YOU WITH VIOLATION GEORGIA 

CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT? 

THE DEPENDANT: YES, SIR. 

THE COURT: AND ARE YOU THE DEVHRON HOWARD WHO IS 

CHARGED IN INDICTMENT 99736 WITH VIOLATION GEORGIA CONTROLLED 

SUBSTANCES ACT? 

THE DEPENDANT: VES, SIR. 

THE COURT: ARE YOU THF GEORGE TERRELL, SR. NAMED IN 

INDICTMENT 95309 WHO IS CHARGED WITH FORGERY IN THE FIRST 

DEGREE IN TWO COUNTS? 

THE DEPENDANT: VES, SIR. 

THE COURT: AND ARE YOU THE ROBERT LEE HIGH THAT'S 

CHARGED IN INDICTMENT NUMBER 98353 WITH VIOLATION GEORGIA 

CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

THE COURT: AND ARE YOU THE CHAUNCEY MCCOY THAT'S 

NAMED IN INDICTMENT 97649 CHARGING YOU WITH THEFT BY TAKING AND 

ENTERING AN AUTOMOBILE? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

THE COURT: AND ARE YOU THE WILLIE CHRISTOPHER 

   



  

2 

TUCKER WHO IS CHARGED IN INDICTMENT 99407 WITH VIOLATION   
GEORGIA CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT? 

THE DEFENDANT: VES, SIR. 

THE COURT: ARE YOU THE SAMUEL GRAY THAT'S CHARGED 

IN INDICTMENT 98446 WITH THE OFFENSE OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES. 

THE COURT: AND ARE YOU THE ELLA TARVER WHO IS 

CHARGED IN INDICTMENT NUMBER 99967 WITH THE OFFENSE OF 

VIOLATION GEORGIA CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

THE COURT: ARE YOU THE RICO ANTONIO BYNUM CHARGED 

WITH BURGLARY IN INDICTMENT 99713? 

THE DEFENDANT: VES. 

THE COURT: AND ARE YOU THE JESSIE JAMES WILLIAMS 

THAT'S CHARGED IN INDICTMENT 99881 WITH THE OFFENSE OF 

VIOLATION GEORGIA CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT? 

THE DEFENDANT: VES. 

THE COURT: AND ARE YOU THE JEFFREY RENOLDA XIRKLAND 

CHARGED WITH THE OFFENSE OF BURGLARY AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT IN 

INDICTMENT 994737? 

THE DEFENDANT: VES, SIR. 

THE COURT: I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TWO CHARGES. 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, THE -- 

THE COURT: YOU'RE ALSO CHARGED IN INDICTMENT 99474 

WITH AGGRAVATED ASSAULT. ARE YOU THAT PERSON? 

 



  

1 THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

Io
 THE COURT: AND ARE YOU THE FLOYD ZILLAMON NAMED IN 

3 INDICTMENT Z-00212 CHARGING YOU WITH THE OFFENSE OF CRIMINAL 

ATTEMPT TO COMMIT ROBBERY? =
 

3 THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR, 

S THE COURT: I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF COUNSEL FOR THE 

7 DEFENDANTS WISH THE COURT TO READ THE CHARGES AGAINST THEIR 

8 PARTICULAR DEFENDANTS AT THIS TIME? 

i
 MR. BARTON: WAIVE FORMAL READING, YOUR HONOR. 

<Q
 

MS. BORSUK: WAIVE FORMAL READING. 

MR. BOYLE: I WILL WAIVE, YOUR HONOR. 

2 MR. FRANKLIN: WAIVE FORMAL READING. 

3 MR. THOMAS: WE'LL WAIVE AS 70 MR. TERRELL. 

4 THE COURT: ALL THE LAWYERS HAVE WAIVED FORMAL 

3 READING. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT. 

3 HAVE EACH OF YOU EXPLAINED TO YOUR CLIENTS THE 

? MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM SENTENCE THAT COULD BE IMPOSED IN EACH OF 

THEIR CASES? u
o
 

3 MR. BARTON: YES, YOUR HONOR. 

J MS. BORSUK: YES, YOUR HONOR. 

i MR. THOMAS: ON BEHALF OF MR. TERRELL I HAVE, YOUR 

2 HONOR. 

3 MR. BOYLE: YES, YOUR HONOR. 

i MR. FRANKLIN: YES, YOUR HONOR. 

p THE COURT: LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT ALL LAWYERS 

 



  

HAVE SO ADVISED THEIR CLIENTS. 

I'D 

AN OPPORTUNITY 

YOUR LAWYER? 

MR. 

LIKE TO KNOW 

TO DISCUSS YOUR CASE FULLY AND COMPLETELY WITE 

THOMAS? 

DEFENDANT: 

COURT: 

DEFENDANT : 

COURT: 

DEFENDANT: 

COURT: 

DEFENDANT: 

COURT: 

DEFENDANT: 

COURT: 

DEFENDANT: 

COURT: 

DEFENDANT: 

COURT: 

DEFENDANT: 

COURT: 

DEFENDANT: 

COURT: 

DEFENDANT : 

COURT: 

MR. 

MR. 

MR. 

MR. 

MR. 

MR. 

MR. 

MP. 

MR. 

MS. 

YES, SIR. 

WRIGHT? 

YES, SIR. 

BRACEY? 

(NODDED AFFIRMATIVELY). 

DAVIS? 

Yes, SIR. 

HOWARD? 

YES, SIR. 

TERRELL? 

MCCOY? 

YES, SIR. 

TUCKER? 

YES. 

GRAY? 

YES, I HAVE. 

TARVER? 

  

IF EACH OF YOU DEFENDANTS HAVE HAD



  

.22 

- 

be 

to
 

IJ
 

THE 

THE 

THE 

THE 

THE 

THE 

THE 

THE 

THE 

THE 

DEFENDANTS THAT 

COURT THAT MAY 

YOU 

YOU 

YOU 

YOU 

LIKE TO ADVISE EACH OF YOU 

TO SAY ANYTHIRG NM TEIS 

TO INCRIMINATE YOU IN ANY WAY, 

RIGHT TO PLEAD NOT GUILTY, 

RIGHT OF TRIAL BY JURY. 

RIGHT TO BE FACED BY YOUR ACCUSERS. 

RIGHT TO PLEAD GUILTY. 

DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

COURT: MR. BYNUM? 

DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

COURT: MR. WILLIAMS? 

DEFENDANT: YES. 

COURT: MR. KIRKLAND? 

DEFENDANT: = YES, SIR. 

COURT: MR. ZILLAMON? 

DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

COURT: I'D 

YOU ARF NOT REZOUIRED 

TEND 

EAVE THE 

HAVE THE 

HAVE THE 

HAVE THE RIGHT OF APPEAL. 

HAVE THE 

HAVE THE RIGHT TO SUBPOENA WITNESSES AND HAVE 

THESE WITNESSES APPEAR IN COURT AND EXAMINED IN YOUR BEHALF AND 

YOU ALSO HAVE THE RIGHT TO CROSS-EXAMINE ANY WITNESSES THAT ARE 

PRESENTED BY THE STATE. 

BY THE COURT: 

0. HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. THOMAS? 

A. SIXTH GRADE. 

Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

 



  

+23 

3 

Io
 

Q. ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? 

A. NO, SIR, NEVER USE IT, NO, SIR. 

0. WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

A. YES, -S1IR. 

0. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TO ENTFR A PLEA IN THIS 

COURT? 

A. NO, SIF. 

THE COURT: I'D L1IXE TO ADVISE YOU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, MR. THOMAS HAS ENTERED A 

PLEA TO VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER ON THIS INDICTMENT. 

THE COURT: iI WILL ACCEPT TEE PLEA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE THE FACTS TO THE COURT MR, WRIGHT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, IF THIS CASE HAD GONE TO 

TRIAL WE WOULD EXPECT THE FACTS TO SHOW THAT ON THE DATE LISTED 

IN THE INDICTMENT THE DEFENDANT ALONG WITH TWO OTHER PERSONS 

WERE IN AN AUTOMOBILE. ONE OF THOSE PERSONS IN THE AUTOMOBILE 

WAS ALSO INDICTED, THAT BEING MR. ROBERT SPAN. AS I UNDERSTAND 

THE FACTS, MR. SPAN HAD ON A PREVIOUS OCCASION BOUGHT SOME, 

 



  

+24 

2 

WHAT HE THOUGHT WAS COCAINE FROM THE VICTIM IN THE CASE. IT 

TURNED OUT NOT TO BE COCAINE. AS A RESULT MR. SPAN GOT INTO A 

PHYSICAL CONFRONTATION WITH THE VICTIM IN THE CASE. AFTER 

COMPLETING THAT PHYSICAL CONFRONTATION THE DEFENDANT HERE, AS I 

UNDERSTAND IT, GOT OUT OF THE CAR, TOOK A SHOTGUN AND SHOT AND 

KILLED THE VICTIM IN THE CASE. 

THOSE ARE SUBSTANTIALLY THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES 

AS I UNDERSTAND THEM. 

THE COURT: ARE THE FACTS STATED BY THE DISTRICT 

ATTORNEY CORRECT, MR. THOMAS? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES. 

THE: COURT: HAS THE STATE ENTERED INTO A PRE-PLEA 

AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYER? 

MR. WRIGHT: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: STATE THE TERMS OF THAT AGREEMENT. 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, THE STATE'S RECOMMENDATION 

ON THIS PLEA TO VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER WOULD BE A SENTENCE OF 

TWENTY YEARS TO SERVE IN THE PENITENTIARY. 

THE COURT: I WILL FOLLOW YOUR RECOMMENDATION AND 

LET MR. THOMAS SERVE A SENTENCE OF TWENTY YEARS IN THE 

PENITENTIARY. 

MR. THOMAS, I'D LIRE TO ADVISE YOU IF YOU THINK TEIS 

SENTENCE IS EXCESSIVE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO FILE AN APPEAL ON 

THE GROUNDS OF EXCESSIVENESS IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE OF THIS 

COURT. SUCH AN APPEAL HAS TO BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY DAYS FROM 

 



25 

[W
1)

 

  

TODAY AND IF YOU NEED A LAWYER TO REPRESENT YOU IN SUCH AN 

APPEAL THE COURT WILL APPOINT APPEAL COUNSEL FOR YOU AT NO COST 

TO YOU. 

MR. BARTON: I WILL TAKE CARE OF THAT, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT, 

By THE COURT: 

0. HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. WRIGHT? 

A. TWELFTH GRADE. 

Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

A YES, SIR 

x. ARE YOU UNDER TEE INFLUENCE OF ANY LRUGS Ux ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? 

A. NO, SIR. 

Q- WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

A. YES, SIR, 

Q. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TO ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

COURT? 

A. NO, SIR. 

THE COURT: I'D LIKE TO ADVISE YOU TEAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON TEE COURT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, MR. WRIGHT HAS SIGNED A 

 



  

126 

1 CUILTY PLEA TO THIS CHARGE AND HE WANTS TO MAKE A STATEMENT AS 

IT RELATES TO THE CO-DEFENDANT INVOLVED IN THE CASE. [<
 

3 THE COURT: ALL RIGHT, MR. WRIGHT, YOU MAY DO SO.   

FS BEN WRIGHT, 

5 SAVING 3EEN FIRST DULY SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AND TESTIFIED AS 

6 FOLLOWS: 

{ DIRECT EXAMINATION 

3 BY MR. WRIGHT: 

9 0. MR. WRIGHT, WHO DID THE MARIJUANA THAT WAS FOUND IN 

8) 1H1IS CASE BELONG TO? 

1) A. MARIJUANA FOUND IN THIS CASE WAS LAYING ON THE BACK 

2 OF THE VEHICLE, BELONGS TO ME. 

3 0. YOUR SON, MR. STANLEY WRIGHT, YOUR SON, WAS ALSO 

4d CHARGED IN THIS BILL OF INDICTMENT. DID ANY OF THOSE DRUGS 

5 THAT WERE CONFISCATED BELONG TO STANLEY WRIGHT? 

5 A. NO, SIR. 

7 MR. WRIGHT: THANK YOU. 

3 THAT'S ALL I HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

$3 THE COURT: - ALL RIGHT. 

0 I WOULD ASSUME YOU WISH TO PUT MR. STANLEY WRIGHT'S 

i CASE ON THE DEAD DOCKET? 

2 MR. WRIGHT: YES, SIR, YOUR HONOR, THE PACTS IN THIS 

2 CASE ARE THEY EXECUTED A SEARCH WARRANT ON MR. WRIGHT'S HOUSE 

4 AND THEY FOUND SEVERAL NICKEL BAGS OF MARIJUANA INSIDE THE 

RESIDENCE AS A RESULT OF SOME INFORMATION THEY HAD RECEIVED ul
 

 



  

bl 

CONCERNING THIS APARTMENT. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 

HAS THE STATE ENTERED INTO A PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT WITH 

THE DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYER? 

MR. WRIGHT: YES WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: STATE THE TERMS OF THAT AGREEMENT. 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, THE STATE'S RECOMMENDATION 

IS A TWO YEAR PROBATED SENTENCE AND A FINE ON MR. WRIGHT. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 

MR, WRIGHT, I WILL LET YOU SERVE A SENTENCE OF TWO 

YEARS AND I WILL PROBATE THAT SENTENCE ON CONDITION THAT ¥0OU 

PAY A FINE IN THE AMOUNT OF SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS AND ON THE 

FURTHER CONDITION THAT YOU NOT VIOLATE TEE LAW, THAT YOU FOLLOW 

THE ORDERS AND THE DIRECTIVES OF THE PROBATION DEPARTMENT AND 

THE COURT. 

MR. BOYLE: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR, 

THE COURT: “ALL RIGHT, 

BY THE COURT: 

Q. HOW FAR DiD YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. BRACEY? 

A TWELFTH. 

Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

A YES. 

Q. ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? 

A. NO. 

 



  

2 

w
 

Q. WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

A. OH, GUILTY, 

Q. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED 70U ANY REWARD 

OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TO ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

COURT? 

A. NO. 

THE COURT: I'D LIKE TO ADVISE YOU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, THE PLEA HAS BEEN SIGNED. 

THE COURT: IT WILL ACCEPT THE PLEA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE THE FACTS TO THE COURT, MR. WRIGHT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, IF THIS CASE HAD GONE TO 

TRIAL WE WOULD EXPECT THE FACTS TO SHOW THAT ON THE DATE LISTED 

IN THE BILL OF INDICTMENT THE DEFENDANT WAS OBSERVED DRIVING AN 

AUTOMOBILE. IT HAD A TAG THAT WAS UNREADABLE, ACCORDING TO THE 

OFFICER'S REPORT. AS A RESULT HE HAD THE DEFENDANT COME FROM 

THE LOCATION WHERE HE HAD LEFT THE AUTOMOBILE, FOUND OUT THE 

DEFENDANT DID NOT HAVE A DRIVER'S LICENSE OR ANY IDENTIFICATION 

ON HIM AT THAT TIME. AS A RESULT HE WAS PLACED UNDER ARREST ON 

TRAFFIC CHARGES. PURSUANT TO A SEARCH OF HIS PERSON ON THE 

ARREST A SMALL AMOUNT OF COCAINE WAS FOUND ON HIM. HE WAS 

CHARGED WITH SIMPLE POSSESSION OF COCAINE. 

 



  
3 

  

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 

ARE THE FACTS STATED BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY 

CORRECT, MR. BRACEY? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES. 

THE COURT: HAS THE STATE ENTERED INTO A PRE-PLEA 

AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYER? 

MR. WRIGHT: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: WILL YOU STATE THE TERMS OF THAT 

AGREEMENT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, THE STATE'S RECOMMENDING A 

NO YEAR PROBATED SENTENCE AND A FINE. 

THE COURT: WELL, MR. BRACEY, I WILL LET YOU SERVE A 

SENTENCE OF TWO YEARS AND I WILL PROBATE THAT SENTENCE ON 

CONDITION THAT YOU PAY A FINE IN THE AMOUNT OF SIX HUNDRED 

DOLLARS, ON THE FURTHER CONDITION THAT YOU NOT VIOLATE THE LAW, 

THAT YOU FOLLOW THE ORDERS AND DIRECTIVES OF THE PROBATION 

DEPARTMENT AND THE COURT. 

MR. FRANKLIN: THANK YOU. 

BY THE COURT: 

QQ: HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. DAVIS? 

A. TWELFTH. 

Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

A. YES. 

Q. ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME?



  

8 

to
 

U
h
 

ld
 

fw
 

A. NO. 

Q. WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

A. YES. 

Q. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TO ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

COURT? 

A. NO. 

THE COURT: I'D LIKE TO ADVISE YOU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, MR. DAVIS HAS TENDERED A 

GUILTY PLEA TO THE LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSE OF SIMPLE POSSESSION 

OF COCAINE. 

THE COURT: 1 WILL ACCEPT THE PLEA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE THE FACTS TO THE COURT, MR. WRIGHT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, IF THIS CASE HAD GONE TO 

TRIAL WE WOULD EXPECT THE FACTS TO BE THAT ON THE DATE LISTED 

IN THE BILL OF INDICTMENT THE DEFENDANT WAS OBSERVED STANDING 

ON THE STREET CORNER. THE OFFICERS, POLICE OFFICERS CAME BY 

AND UPON SEEING THE POLICE OFFICERS THE DEFENDANT WALKED AWAY. 

THE OFFICERS INDICATE IN THEIR REPORT THAT THEY SAW THE 

DEFENDANT AS HE WAS WALKING AWAY DROP AN ITEM TO THE GROUND. 

THE OFFICERS INDICATE THAT AFTER STOPPING THE DEFENDANT THEY 

 



  

2 

He
 

WENT BACK AND FOUND WHAT HE HAD DROPPED AND DISCOVERED THAT IT 

CONTAINED WHAT THEY BELIEVED TO BE WERE, EXCUSE ME, CONTAINED 

WHAT THEY BELIEVED TO BE WAS COCAINE. THEY INDICATE THAT IT 

WAS PACKAGED INDIVIDUALLY, SEVERAL PACKS, AND THEY CHARGED HIM 

WITH POSSESSION OF COCAINE WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE. 

THOSE ARE SUBSTANTIALLY THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES 

OF THE CASE, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: ARE THE FACTS AS STATED BY THE DISTRICT 

ATTORNEY CORRECT, MR. DAVIS? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES. 

THE COURT: HAS THE STATE ENTERED INTO A PRE-PLEA 

AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYER? 

MR. WRIGHT: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR, 

THE COURT: WILL YOU STATE THE TERMS OF THAT 

AGREEMENT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, MY NEGOTIATIONS WITH MR. 

FRANKLIN HAVE INCLUDED REDUCING THIS TO SIMPLE POSSESSION OF 

COCAINE AND RECOMMENDING THREE YEARS PROBATION ON CONDITION 

THAT HE COMPLETE NINETY-SIX HOURS OF COMMUNITY SERVICE AND PAY 

A PINE TO BE IMPOSED BY THE COURT, 

THE COURT: WELL, MR. DAVIS, I WILL LET YOU SERVE A 

SENTENCE OF THREE YEARS AND I WILL PROBATE THAT SENTENCE ON 

CONDITION THAT YOU PAY A FINE IN THE AMOUNT OF SIX HUNDRED 

DOLLARS WHICH WILL COVER SOME OF THE COST OF YOUR SUPERVISION 

WHILE ON PROBATION AND ON THE FURTHER CONDITION THAT YOU RENDER 

 



  

2 
J 

COMMUNITY SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF NINETY-SIX HOURS AND ON THE 

FURTHER CONDITION THAT YOU FOLLOW THE ORDERS AND DIRECTIVES OF 

THE PROBATION DEPARTMENT AND ALSO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES 

SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES =-- 

MR. FRANKLIN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: -- AND THAT YOU NOT VIOLATE THE LAW. 

BY THE COURT: 

Q. HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. HOWARD? 

A. SEVENTH GRADE. 

Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

A. SAY NOW? 

Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

A YES, S1R. 

Q. ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? 

A. NO, SIR. 

Q. WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

A. YES, SIR. 

Q. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TO ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

COURT? 

A. NO, SIR. 

THE COURT: I'D LIKE TO ADVISE YOU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

 



    

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, PLEA HAS BEEN SIGNED. 

THE COURT: I WILL ACCEPT THE PLEA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE THE FACTS TO THE COURT, MR. WRIGHT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, IF THIS CASE HAD GONE TO 

TRIAL WE WOULD EXPECT THE FACTS TO SHOW THAT ON THE DATE LISTED 

IN THE INDICTMENT THE DEFENDANT WAS OPERATING A MOTORCYCLE. 

OFFICERS STOPPED HIM FOR PURPOSES OF TRAFFIC CHARGES FOR 

PURPOSES OF CHECKING HIS IDENTIFICATION AND LICENSE. HE HAD 

NEITHER AND AS A RESULT HE WAS ARRESTED ON THE TRAFFIC CHARGES 

AND PURSUANT TO THE ARREST THEY SEARCHED HIM AND FOUND A SMALL 

AMOUNT OF COCAINE ON HIS PERSON. 

THE COURT: ARE THE FACTS STATED BY THE DISTRICT 

ATTORNEY CORRECT, MR. HOWARD? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

THE COURT: HAS THE STATE ENTERED INTO A PRE-PLEA 

AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYER? 

MR. WRIGHT: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: STATE THE TERMS OF THAT AGREEMENT. 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, THE STATE'S RECOMMENDATION 

IS A TWO YEAR PROBATED SENTENCE ON THE CONDITION THAT HE 

COMPLETE FORTY-EIGHT HOURS OF COMMUNITY SERVICE AND PAY A FINE 

TO BE IMPOSED BY THE COURT. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 

 



  

i MR. HOWARD, I WILL LET YOU SERVE A SENTENCE OF TWO 

L YEARS AND I WILL PROBATE THAT SENTENCE ON CONDITION THAT YOU 

3 PAY A FINE IN THE AMOUNT OF SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS, ON THE FURTHER 

4 CONDITION THAT YOU CONTRIBUTE FORTY-EIGHT HOURS OF COMMUNITY 

3 SERVICE AND THAT YOU FOLLOW THE ORDERS AND DIRECTIVES OF THE 

COURT, THE PROBATION DEPARTMENT AND THE SUPERVISORS OF THE (9 
J] 

COMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAM AND THAT YOU NOT VIOLATE THE LAW IN 

ANY DEGREE. 68
] 

2 THE DEFENDANT: THANK YOU, 

3 MS. BORSUK: THANK YOU. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 

2 BY THE COURT: 

3 Q. HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. TERRELL? 

4 A. TWELFTH. 

5 Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

6 A YES. 

£5 ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? co
 

3 A. NO. 

0 Q. WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

1 WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

2 A. YES. 

3 Q- HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

4 OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TO ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

5 COURT? 

 



  

2 

A. NO. 

THE COURT: I'D LIKE TO ADVISE YOU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: PLEA HAS BEEN SIGNED, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: IT WILL ACCEPT THE PLEA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE THE FACTS TO THE COURT, MR. WRIGHT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR,, IF THIS CASE HAD GONE T 

TRIAL WE WOULD EXPECT THE FACTS TO SHOW THAT ON THE, OR BETWEEN 

HE DATES LISTED IN THE BILL OF INDICTMENT THE DEFENDANT HAL 

ORDERED SOME MERCHANDISE, BEING OFFICE FURNITURE TYPE 

MERCHANDISE, FROM A COMPANY I BELIEVE IN NEW JERSEY. HE 

ORDERED THE MERCHANDISE C.0.D. AND WHEN THE U.P.S. DEALER WOULD 

DROP OFF THE FURNITURE IN THESE TWO PARTICULAR CASES HE GAVE 

THEM FORGED CHECKS, TWO OF THEM. AS A RESULT THE COMPANY LOST 

THE MONIES AS IT RELATED TO THE DELIVERY OF THE FURNITURE 

BECAUSE THE CHECKS DID NOT GO THROUGH. 

THOSE ARE SUBSTANTIALLY THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES 

OF THE TWO FORGERY CASES. HE GAVE THE FORGED CHECKS TO A 

U.P.S. DEALER FOR FURNITURE THAT HE RECEIVED. 

THE COURT: ARE THE FACTS STATED BY THE DISTRICT 

ATTORNEY CORRECT, MR. TERRELL? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 

 



  

2 

Ot
 

1
 

  

HAVE YOU ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH MR. THOMAS 

AS COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENDANT? 

MR. WRIGHT: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: STATE THE TERMS OF THAT AGREEMENT. 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, OUR RECOMMENDATION ON THIS 

CASE IS GONNA BE A SENTENCE OF THREE YEARS TO SERVE EIGHT 

MONTHS IN CONFINEMENT ON CONDITION THAT HE PAY RESTITUTICN TO 

THE VICTIM IN THE AMOUNT OF FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND WE'D ASK 

THAT BOTH COUNTS BE ALLOWED TO RUN CONCURRENTLY. HE ALSO HAS A 

PENDING CASE, OR A PRIOR CASE AND IN THAT CASE HE'S ON 

PROBATION. WE'RE GOING TO ASK THE COURT TO REVOKE. I BLLIFVE 

HE HAS ABOUT SEVEN MONTHS LEFT ON THAT CASE. 

THE COURT: DOES HE WAIVE NOTICE? 

MR. THOMAS: YES, YOUR HONOR, WE DO WAIVE NOTICE AND 

WE'RE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT, MR. THOMAS, IF HE WAIVES 

NOTICE, AND ON THIS CHARGE I WILL LET HIM SERVE THREE YEARS ON 

COUNT NUMBER ONE, PERMIT HIM TO BE RELEASED AFTER HE SERVES 

EIGHT MONTHS OF THAT SENTENCE AND 1 WILL LET HIM SERVE THE 

BALANCE ON PROBATION ON CONDITION THAT HE PAY A FINE IN THE 

AMOUNT OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND ON THE FURTHER CONDITION 

THAT HE MAKE RESTITUTION TO THE VICTIM IN THIS CASE IN THE 

AMOUNT OF FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS, AND ON COUNT NUMBER TWO A 

SENTENCE OF THREE TO SERVE ONE, THAT IS, TO SERVE EIGHT MONTHS 

AND THE BALANCE ON PROBATION AND LET IT RUN CONCURRENT WITH THE 

 



  

2 

te
 

[1
8 

SENTENCE IMPOSED IN COUNT NUMBER ONE. AND I, OF COURSE, WILL 

LET, SIGN AN ORDER REVOKING EIGHT MONTHS OR THE BALANCE OF HIS 

SENTENCE, THAT IS, REVOKE THAT BALANCE ON THE OTHER SENTENCE 

AND I WILL LET IT RUN CONCURRENT WITH THE SENTENCES IMPOSED IN 

THIS CASE. 

MR. THOMAS: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. 

BY THE COURT: 

0. HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. HIGH? 

A. TWELFTH. 

0. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

A ZEST SIR 

a, ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? 

A. NO, SIR. 

Q. WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

A. ves, IT WILL, 

0. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TC ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

COURT? 

A. NO, SIR, 

THE COURT: I'D LIKF TO ADVISE YOU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

 



  

2 

MR. WRIGHT: PLEA HAS BEEN SIGNED, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: I WILL ACCEPT THE PLEA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE THE FACTS TO THE COURT, MR. WRIGHT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, IF THIS CASE HAD GONE TO 

TRIAL WE WOULD EXPECT THE FACTS TO BE THAT ON THE DATE LISTED 

IN THE BILL OF INDICTMENT OFFICERS EXECUTED A SEARCH WARRANT AT 

THE DEFENDANT'S RESIDENCE. AS A RESULT THEY FOUND A NUMBER OF 

PEOPLE THAT WERE ALSO ARRESTED AS WELL AS SEVERAL ITEMS OF 

DRUGS AND DRUG PARAPHERNALIA. HE WAS CHARGED SPECIFICALLY WITH 

POSSESSING A SMALL AMOUNT OF COCAINE AND A SMALLER AMOUNT OF 

MARIJUANA. 

THE COURT: ARE THE FACTS STATED BY THE DISTRICT 

ATTORNEY CORRECT, MR. HIGH? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

THE COURT: HAS THE STATE ENTERED INTO A PRE-PLEA 

AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYER? 

MR. WRIGHT: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: STATE THE TERMS OF THAT AGREEMENT. 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, THE STATE'S RECOMMENDATION 

IS A SENTENCE OF THREE YEARS TO SERVE SEVEN MONTHS IN 

CONFINEMENT ON BOTH THESE CHARGES, ON THE FELONY, AND TWELVE 

MONTHS TO SERVE SEVEN MONTHS ON THE MISDEMEANOR CONCURRENTLY. 

MR. HIGH IS CURRENTLY ON PROBATION AND I UNDERSTAND HE WANTS TO 

HAVE SEVEN MONTHS OF THAT CURRENT PROBATION REVOKED 

CONCURRENTLY WITH THIS. 

 



  

THE COURT: DOES HE WAIVE NOTICE? 

MS. BORSUK: YES, YOUR HONOR, 

THE COURT: SINCE HE WAIVES NOTICE, ON COUNT ONE, 

MR. HIGH, I WILL LET YOU SERVE A SENTENCE OF THREE YEARS AND I 

WILL PERMIT YOU TO BE RELEASED AFTER YOU SERVE SEVEN MONTHS AND 

I WILL LET YOU SERVE THE BALANCE ON PROBATION ON CONDITION THAT 

70U PAY A FINE IN THE AMOUNT OF SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS AND ON THE 

FURTHER CONDITION THAT YOU NOT VIOLATE THE LAW, THAT YOU FOLLOW 

THE ORDERS AND DIRECTIVES OF THE PROBATION DEPARTMENT AND OF 

THE COURT. 

ON. COUNT RJRUMBPER TWO, TWELVE MONTHS T4 GEZRVI SEVEN 

MONTHS, PERMIT YOU TO BE RELEASED AFTER YOU SERVE SEIVIN MONTHS 

OF THAT SENTENCE AND I WILL LET IT RUN CONCURRENT WITH THE 

SENTENCE IMPOSED IN COUNT NUMBER ONE, AND WITH REFERENCE 7T0 THE 

REVOCATION, SEVEN MONTHS, I WILL LET THAT RUN CONCURRENT AND 

LET THE SENTENCES IN BOTH COUNTS IN THIS CASE RUN CONCURRENT 

#ITH THE REVOCATED SENTENCE, ~~ 

MS. BORSUK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: -- THAT YOU NOT VIOLATE THE LAW, THAT 

YOU FOLLOW THE ORDERS AND DIRECTIVES OF THE PROBATICN 

DEPARTMENT AND THE COURT. 

BY THE COURT: 

Q. HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. MCCOY? 

A. TWELFTH GRADE, SIR. 

Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

 



  

Q. ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? 

A. NO, SIR. 

Q. WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

A. YES, ‘S1R. 

0. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TO ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

COURT? 

A. NO, SIR, 

THE COURT: I'D LIKE TO ADVISE YOU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, MR. MCCOY HAS ENTERED HIS 

THE COURT: 1 WILL ACCEPT THE PLEA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE THE FACTS TO THE COURT, MR. WRIGHT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, IF THIS CASE HAD GONE TO 

TRIAL WE WOULD EXPECT THE FACTS TO SHOW THAT BETWEEN THE DATES 

LISTED IN THE BILL OF INDICTMENT THE DEFENDANT ALONG WITH HIS 

CO-DEFENDANTS WERE ENGAGED IN WHAT THE OFFICERS FOUND TO BE A 

SITUATION WHERE THEY WERE GOING BY AND GOING INTO AUTOMOBILES 

AND REMOVING THE CONTENTS OF THOSE PARTICULAR AUTOMOBILES. IT 

 



  

INVOLVED A SITUATION WHERE THEY WENT INTO THREE SEPARATE AND 

INDEPENDENT AUTOMOBILES AND TOOK THE ITEMS LISTED IN THE BILL 

OF INDICTMENT. THE THEFT BY TAKING WAS BECAUSE OF A PISTOL 

THAT WAS TAKEN FROM ONE OF THE AUTOMOBILES AS IT WAS ENTERED. 

THOSE ARE SUBSTANTIALLY THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES 

EXCEPT TO SAY THAT THE OTHER TWO CO-DEFENDANTS WERE SENT TO 

PRETRIAL AND THIS DEFENDANT HERE WAS ALREADY IN THE DODGE 

COUNTY PROGRAM AT THE TIME THAT THIS PARTICULAR THING WAS 

WORKED OUT AND WE KNEW THAT HE WOULD BE BACK AT A LATER DATE AT 

THE TIME. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT, 

ARE THE FACTS STATED BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY 

CORRECT, MR. MCCOY? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

THE COURT: HAS THE STATE ENTERED INTO A PRE-PLEA 

AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYER? 

MR. WRIGHT: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: STATE THE TERMS OF THAT AGREEMENT. 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, THE STATE'S RECOMMENDATION 

IS A TWO YEAR PROBATED SENTENCE ON THE CONDITION THAT HE PAY A 

FINE. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 

MR. MCCOY, ON COUNT NUMBER ONE I WILL LET YOU SERVE 

A SENTENCE OF TWO YEARS AND I WILL PROBATE THAT SENTENCE ON 

CONDITION THAT YOU PAY A FINE IN THE AMOUNT OF SIX HUNDRED 

 



  

3 DOLLARS, ON THE FURTHER CONDITION THAT YOU NOT VIOLATE THE LAW, 

THAT YOU FOLLOW THE ORDERS AND DIRECTIVES OF THE PROBATION 

DEPARTMENT AND THE COURT, AND ON COUNTS NUMBER TWO AND THREE -- 

THOSE ARE FELONIES, AREN'T THEY? 

MR. WRIGHT: YES, SIR, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: I WILL LET YOU SERVE A SENTENCE OF TWO 

YEARS ON EACH OF THOSE COUNTS AND LET IT RUN CONCURRENT WITH 

THE SENTENCE IMPOSED, LET THEM, RATHER, RUN CONCURRENT WITH THE 

SENTENCE IMPOSED IN COUNT NUMBER ONE AND ON THE FURTHER 

CONDITION THAT YOU NOT VIOLATE THE LAW, THAT YOU FOLLOW THE 

ORDERS AND DIRECTIVES OF THE PROBATION DEPARTMENT AND OF THE 

COURT. 

BY THE COURT: 

Q. HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. TUCKER? 

A HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE. 

Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

A YES, SIR. 

Q. ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? 

A. NO. 

Q. WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

a. YES. 

Q. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TO ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

 



  

COURT? 

A. NO. 

THE COURT: I'D LIKE TO ADVISE YQU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, PLEA HAS BEEN ENTERED. 

THE COURT: IY WILL ACCEPT THE PLFA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE THE FACTS TO THE COURT, MR. WRIGHT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, IF THIS CASE HAD GONE TO 

TRIAL WE WOULD EXPECT THE EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE DEFENDANT 

WAS PARKED IN AN AUTOMOBILE LATE AT NIGHT IN AN APARTMENT 

COMPLEX WHERE THERE HAD BEEN A LOT OF BURGLARIES. POLICE 

OFFICERS DROVE BY AND NOTICED HIM IN THE CAR, ASKED HIM WHAT HE 

WAS DOING THERE AND -- ASKED HIM WHAT HE WAS DOING THERE, ASKED 

FOR SOME IDENTIFICATION. HE COULDN'T PRODUCE IDENTIFICATION OR 

A DRIVER'S LICENSE. AT THIS POINT THE OFFICERS HAD OCCASION TO 

PLACE HIM UNDER ARREST, BEING THERE WITHOUT A DRIVER'S 

LICENSE. PURSUANT TO THE ARREST THEY FOUND A SMALL AMOUNT OF 

COCAINE ON HIS PERSON. HE WAS CHARGED WITH THAT. 

THE COURT: ARE THE FACTS STATED BY THE DISTRICT 

ATTORNEY CORRECT, MR. TUCKER? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES. 

THE COURT: HAS THE STATE ENTERED INTO A PRE-PLEA 

AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYER? 

 



  
24 

25 

MR. WRIGHT: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: WILL YOU STATE THE TERMS OF THAT 

AGREEMENT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, THE STATE'S RECOMMENDATION 

IN THIS CASE IS GONNA BE A SENTENCE OF THREE YEARS TO SERVE 

SEVEN MONTHS IN CONFINEMENT ON CONDITION THAT HE PAY A FINE. 

THE REASON FOR THAT IS THAT HE HAS A CURRENT CASE ON PROBATION 

FROM THIS COURT, INDICTMENT 85694. I UNDERSTAND HE WANTS SEVEN 

MONTHS REVOKED ON THAT TO RUN CONCURRENT WITH THIS. 

MS. BORSUK: THAT'S CORRECT, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: HE WAIVES NOTICE? 

MS. BORSUK:. YES, YOUR HONOK. 

THE COURT: MR. TUCKER, == 

MR. WRIGHT: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR, I'M SORRY, BUT I 

UNDERSTAND FROM MRS. HARRISON THAT HE ALSO HAS A MISDEMEANOR 

THAT SHE WANTS SEVEN MONTHS ALSO CONCURRENT. 

THE PROBATION OFFICER: THAT IS CORRECT, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 

MR. TUCKER, ON COUNT NUMBER ONE, ONLY COUNT IN THIS 

INDICTMENT, I WILL LET YOU SERVE A SENTENCE OF THREE YEARS AND 

I WILL PERMIT YOU TO BE RELEASED AFTER YOU SERVE SEVEN MONTHS 

OF THAT SENTENCE AND I WILL LET YOU YOU SERVE THE BALANCE ON 

PROBATION ON CONDITION THAT YOU PAY A FINE IN THE AMOUNT OF SIX 

HUNDRED DOLLARS, ON THE CONDITION THAT YOU NOT VIOLATE THE LAW, 

THAT YOU FOLLOW THE ORDERS AND DIRECTIVES OF THE PROBATION 

 



  

DEPARTMENT AND OF THE COURT, AND ON THE FURTHER -- WITH 

REFERENCE TO BOTH OF YOUR SENTENCES ON WHICH YOU HAVE PROBATED 

SENTENCES, SINCE YOU WAIVE NOTICE I WILL REVOKE SEVEN MONTHS ON 

EACH OF THOSE TO RUN CONCURRENT WITH EACH OF THEM AND 

CONCURRENT WITH THE SENTENCE IMPOSED IN THIS CASE AND IT'S 

PROBATED FURTHER ON CONDITION THAT YOU NOT VIOLATE THE LAW AND 

ON CONDITION THAT YOU FOLLOW THE ORDERS AND DIRECTIVES OF THE 

PROBATION DEPARTMENT AND THE COURT WHEN YOU'RE RELEASED FROM 

THE PENITENTIARY. 

MS. BORSUK: = THANK YOU. 

BY THE COURT: 

g-. HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. GRAY? 

A. HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE. 

Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

A. YES, I 10. 

Q. ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? 

A. NO, I'M NOT, 

Q. WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

A. YES, IT WILL. 

Q. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TO ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

COURT? 

A. NO, SIR, YOUR HONOR. 

 



  

THE COURT: I'D LIKE TO ADVISE YOU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, MR. GRAY HAS ENTERED A PLEA 

TO SIMPLE ASSAULT. 

THE COURT: I WILL ACCEPT R1S PLEA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE THE FACTS TO THE COURT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, AS I UNDERSTAND THE FACTS 

OF THIS CASE, MR. GRAY AND THE VICTIM IN THIS CASE, MR. LARRY 

CHISHOLM, APPARENTLY KNEW EACH OTHER. SOME SORT OF ALTERCATION 

OR DISPUTE AROSE OVER THE VICTIM GIVING THE DEFENDANT SOME 

MONEY. THE VICTIM AS I UNDERSTAND IT SAID HE DIDN'T HAVE ANY 

MONEY AND THE DEFENDANT HERE DIDN'T BELIEVE HIM AND AS A RESULT 

STRUCK THE VICTIM WITH A KNIFE, CAUSING INJURIES WHICH LED TO 

HIM BEING CHARGED WITH AGGRAVATED ASSAULT. AFTER TALKING WITH 

THE VICTIM AND GETTING HIS POINT OF VIEW ON THIS PARTICULAR 

THING WE HAVE AGREED TO REDUCE THIS TO SIMPLE ASSAULT. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 

ARE THE FACTS STATED BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY 

CORRECT, MR. GRAY? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, THEY ARE. 

THE COURT: HAS THE STATE ENTERED INTO A PRE-PLEA 

AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYER? 

MR. WRIGHT: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

 



  

2 

24 

25 

THE COURT: STATE TEE TERMS OF THAT AGREEMENT, 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, THE STATE'S RECOMMENDATION 

IS A SENTENCE OF TWELVE MONTHS TO SERVE, COMMUTED TO THE TIME 

THAT HE'S ALREADY SERVED IN PRISON. 

THE COURT: I WILL FOLLOW YOUR RECOMMENDATION. 

MS. BORSUK: THANK YOU. 

THE COURT: SUSPENDED ON TIME SERVED, 

BY THE COURT: 

0. HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MS. TARVER? 

A. TWELFTH GRADE. 

Q. YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

A. YES, SIR. 

Q. ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? 

A. RO, SIR. 

Q. WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

WILL 1T BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

A. YES, SIR. 

0. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TO ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

COURT? 

A. NO, SIP. 

THE COURT: I'D LIKE TO ADVISE YOU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

 



  

148 

  

{PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, MS. TARVER HAS ENTERED A 

GUILTY PLEA TO SIMPLE POSSESSION OF COCAINE. 

THE COURT: I WILL ACCEPT THE PLEA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE THE FACTS TO THE COURT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, IF THIS CASE HAD GONE TO 

TRIAL WE WOULD EXPECT THE EVIDENCE TO BE THAT ON THE DATE 

LISTED IN THE BILL OF INDICTMENT THE OFFICERS INVOLVED IN THIS 

CASE HAD A SEARCH WARRANT. IT WAS FOR ONE OF MS. TARVER'S SONS 

AND A SECOND PERSON. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RELATIONSHIP 

BETWEEN THE SECOND PERSON AND M5, TARVER IS UR WAS. AS A 

RESULT OF THIS WARRANT THEY FOUND MS. TARVER AS BEING THE ONLY 

PERSON IN THE HOUSE, INSIDE OF THE HOUSE THEY FOUND SEVERAL 

BAGS OF COCAINE, AS I UNDERSTAND THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF 

THIS CASE. THE SON AND THE PERSON THAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR 

WERE IN JAIL AT THE TIME THAT THEY EXECUTED THIS PARTICULAR 

SEARCH WARRANT BUT THE DRUGS WERE FOUND INSIDE THE HOUSE AND 

MS. TARVER BEING THE ONLY PERSON IN THERE WAS CHARGED WITH 

POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE. AFTER NEGOTIATIRG WITH 

MS. BORSUK WE HAVE AGREED TO LET HER PLEAD TO SIMPLE POSSESSION 

OF COCAINE. 

THE COURT. ALL RIGHT. 

ARE THE PACTS STATED BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY 

CORRECT, MS. TARVER? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

 



  

3 THE COURT: HAS THE STATE ENTERED INTO A PRE-PLEA 

2 AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENDANT AND HER LAWYER? 

3 MR. WRIGHT: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

A THE COURT: STATE THE TERMS OF THAT AGREEMENT. 

5 MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, THE STATE IS RECOMMENDING A 

6 TWO YEAR PROBATED SENTENCE ON THE CONDITION THAT SHE PAY A 

2 FINE. 

8 THE COURT: MS. TARVER, I WILL LET YOU SERVE A 

9 SENTENCE OF TWO YEARS, PROBATE IT ON THE CONDITION THAT YOU PAY 

10 A FINE OF SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS, ON THE FURTHER CONDITION THAT 

11 YOU NOT VIOLATE THE LAW, THAT YOU FOLLOW THE ORDERS AND 

12 DIRECTIVES OF THE PROBATION DEPARTMENT AND OF THE COURT. 

13 BY THE COURT: 

14 Q. HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. BYNUM? 

15 A. HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE. 

16 Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

17 A. YES. 

i8 Q. ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

ig INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? 

20 A. NO, SIR. 

21 Q. WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

22 WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

23 A. YES, SIR. 

24 Q. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

25 OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TO ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

 



  
24 

25 

COURT? 

A. NO. 

THE COURT: I'D LIKE TO ADVISE YOU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, MR. BYNUM ENTERED A PLEA TO 

CRIMINAL TRESPASS. 

THE COURT: I WILL ACCEPT THE PLEA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE THE FACTS TO THE COURT, MR. WRIGHT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, IF THIS CASE EAD GONE TO 

TRIAL WE WOULD EXPECT THE PACTS TO SHOW THAT ON THE DATE LISTED 

IN THE BILL OF INDICTMENT OFFICERS WITH THE ATLANTA POLICE 

DEPARTMENT RECEIVED A SILENT ALARM TO WALKER ELEMENTARY 

SCHOOL. AS A RESULT THE OFFICERS WENT TO THAT SCHOOL AND THEY 

FOUND INSIDE OF THE BUILDING THE DEFENDANT ALONG WITH ANOTHER 

PERSON, WHO HAPPENED TO BE A JUVENILE. THE JUVENILE WAS TAKEN 

TO JUVENILE COURT AND THIS DEFENDANT WAS ARRESTED AND PLACED IN 

JAIL ON A BURGLARY CHARGE. ACCORDING TO MY INFORMATION THERE 

WAS NOTHING MISSING. THERE WAS SOME MOVING AROUND OF ITEMS 

INSIDE THE BUILDING AND HE WAS CHARGED WITH BURGLARY. HE'S 

PLEADING GUILTY TO CRIMINAL TRESPASS. 

THE COURT: ARE THE PACTS STATED BY -THE DISTRICT 

ATTORNEY CORRECT? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES. 

 



  

THE COURT: HAS THE STATE ENTERED INTO A PRE-PLEA 

AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYER? 

MR. WRIGHT: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: STATE THE TERMS OF THAT AGREEMENT. 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, WE'VE AGREED TO A TWELVE 

MONTH PROBATED SENTENCE ON THE CONDITION THAT HE COMPLETE 

FORTY-EIGHT HOURS OF COMMUNITY SERVICE AND PAY A FINE. 

THE COURT: MR. BYNUM, I WILL LET YOU SERVE A 

SENTENCE OF TWELVE MONTHS AND I WILL PROBATE THAT SENTENCE ON 

CONDITION THAT YOU PAY A FINE OF THREE HUNDRED DOLLARS, ON THE 

FURTHER CONDITION THAT vOU CORTRIBUTE FORTY-EIGHET 2UURS OF 

COMMUNITY SERVICE, THAT YOU FOLLOW THE ORDERS AND DIRECTIVES OF 

THE PROBATION DEPARTMENT AND THE COURT AND THE OFFICIALS WITH 

THE COMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAM. 

BY THE COURT: 

Q. HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. WILLIAMS? 

A. TO THE NINTH. 

0. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

A. YES, SIR, 

J. ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? 

A. NO, SIR. 

Qo: WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

 



  

i 

nN
 

  

Q. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TO ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

COURT? 

A. NO, SIR. 

THE COURT: I'D LIKE TO ADVISE YOU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, THE PLEA HAS BFEN ENTERED. 

THE COURT: I WILL ACCEPT THE PLEA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE-THE FACTS TO THE COURT, MR. WRIGHT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, IF THIS CASE HAD GONE TO 

TRIAL WE WOULD EXPECT THE FACTS TO BE THAT ON THE DATE LISTED 

IN THE BILL OF INDICTMENT OFFICERS WITH THE ATLANTA POLICE 

DEPARTMENT HAD OCCASION TO GO TO THE ADDRESS OF 288% LEILA LANE 

AS A RESULT OF A FIGHT CALL. AS I UNDERSTAND THE FACTS IN 

TH1S, THE DEFENDANT HERE HAD STRUCK HIS NEPHEW, I BELIEVE, WITH 

A STICK AND THAT WAS WHAT THE POLICE WERE CALLED FOR. AS A 

RESULT OF THE POLICE COMING THERE BECAUSE OF THE FIGHT CALL 

THEY HAD OCCASION TO ARREST THE DEFENDANT ON THE CHARGE, I 

BELIEVE, OF SIMPLE ASSAULT FOR HITTING THE NEPHEW WITH A 

STICK. THEY SEARCHED HIM AND THEY FOUND SOME COCAINE ON HIS 

PERSON, A SMALL AMOUNT I BELIEVE IT WAS. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 

ARE THE FACTS STATED BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY 

 



  

CORRECT, MR. WILLIAMS? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

THE COURT: HAS THE STATE ENTERED INTO A PRE-PLEA 

AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYER? 

MR. WRIGHT: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: STATE THE TERMS OF THAT AGREEMENT. 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, THE STATE'S RECOMMENDATION 

IS A TWO YEAR PROBATED SENTENCE ON THE CONDITION THAT HE PAY A 

FINE. 

THE COURT: MR. WILLIAMS, 1 WILL LET YOU SERVE A 

SENTENCE OF TWO YEARS AND I WILL PROBATE THAT SENTENCE ON 

CONDITION THAT YOU PAY A FINE IN THE AMOUNT OF SIX HUNDRED 

DOLLARS AND ON THE FURTHER CONDITION THAT YOU NOT VIOLATE THE 

LAW, THAT YOU FOLLOW THE ORDERS AND DIRECTIVES OF THE PROBATION 

DEPARTMENT AND THE COURT. 

MS. BORSUK: THANK YOU. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT, 

BY THE COURT: 

Q. HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. KIRKLAND? 

A TWO YEARS IN COLLEGE. 

Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

A YES. 

Q. ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? 

A. NO, NO, SIR. 

   



    

Q. WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

A. YES. 

Q. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER TO GET YOU TO ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

COURT? 

A. NO, SIR. 

THE COURT: I'D LIKE TO ADVISE YOU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

( PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, AS IT RELATES TO -- MR, 

KIRKLAND HAS TWO CASES. AS RELATES TO INDICTMENT A-99473 WE'RE 

GOING TO MOVE TO DEAD DOCKET THAT ONE. THE VICTIM SIGNED A 

WAIVER OF PROSECUTION IN THAT CASE. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT 

MR. WRIGHT: HE'S PLEADING GUILTY ON THE SECOND ONE. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

MR. WRIGHT: PLEA HAS BEEN SIGNED, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: I WILL ACCEPT THE PLEA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE THE FACTS TO THE COURT, MR. WRIGHT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, APPARENTLY THIS CASE ARISES 

OUT OF AN ONGOING DOMESTIC DISPUTE WITH THE VICTIM IN THIS 

CASE, MS. GAIL MAHONEY. AS I UNDERSTAND THE FACTS OF THIS 

PARTICULAR CASE THE DEFENDANT STRUCK MS. MAHONEY WITH HIS HANDS 

 



  

AND FEET, CAUSING HER SOME INJURIES WHERE SHE HAD TO GO TO THE 

HOSPITAL. I HAVE TALKED TO MS. MAHONEY ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. 

SHE WAS HERE THIS MORNING PURSUANT TO MY REQUEST. AFTER 

TALKING TO HER SHE HAS INDICATED TO ME THAT SHE WISHES, DOES 

NOT WISH FOR MR. KIRKLAND TO BE INCARCERATED ANYMORE BUT SHE 

DOES WISH TO HAVE HIM PLACED ON PROBATION AND ON THE CONDITION 

THAT HE STAY AWAY FROM HER. SHE ALSO INDICATED TO ME THAT HE 

PROBABLY HAS AN ALCOHOL PROBLEM AND MY RECOMMENDATION IS BASED 

UPON THE INFORMATION SHE'S GIVEN ME CONCERNING THIS CASE. 

THOSE ARE SUBSTANTIALLY THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES. 

THE COURT: ARE THE FACTS STATED BY TEE CISTRICT 

ATTORNEY CORRECT, MR. KIRKLAND? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, 

THE COURT: MR. WRIGHT, HAVE YOU ENTERED INTO A 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYER? 

MR. WRIGHT: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. 

THE COURT: ‘STATE THE TERMS OF THAT AGREEMENT. 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, WE'VE AGREED TC A THREE 

YEAR PROBATED SENTENCE ON THE CONDITION THAT HE COMPLETE SOME 

ALCOHOL TREATMENT AND ALSO STAY AWAY FROM MS. MAHONEY. 

THE COURT: MR. KIRKLAND, I WILL LET YOU SERVE A 

SENTENCE OF THREE YEARS AND I WILL PROBATE THAT SENTENCE ON 

CONDITION THAT YOU PAY A FINE IN THE AMOUNT OF SIX HUNDRED 

DOLLARS AND ON THE FURTHER CONDITION THAT YOU COMPLETE AN 

ALCOHOLIC TREATMENT PROGRAM AND THAT YOU NOT BOTHER OR DISTURB 

 



  

THE VICTIM IN THIS CASE IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, BY CALLING 

HER OVER THE TELEPHONE OR ACCOSTING HER ON THE STREET OR AT HER 

HOME AND RESIDENCE OR ANY OTHER PLACE, THAT YOU NOT VIOLATE THE 

LAW, THAT YOU FOLLOW THE ORDERS AND DIRECTIVES OF THE PROBATION 

DEPARTMENT AND OF THE COURT. 

MR. BARTON: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. 

BY THE COURT: 

Q. HOW FAR DID YOU GO IN SCHOOL, MR. ZILLAMON? 

A. TENTH GRADE. 

Q. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE? 

A. YES, SIR. 

Q. ARE YOU UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY DRUGS OR ANY 

INTOXICANTS AT THIS TIME? 

A. NO, SIR. 

Q. WHATEVER PLEA THAT YOU MAY ENTER IN COURT TODAY, 

WILL IT BE OF YOUR OWN FREE WILL? 

A. YES, SIR. 

Q. HAS ANYONE THREATENED YOU OR OFFERED YOU ANY REWARD 

OR HOPE THEREOF IN ORDER T0 GET YOU TO ENTER A PLEA IN THIS 

COURT? 

A. NO, SIR. 

THE COURT: I'D LIKE TO ADVISE YOU THAT ANY ALLEGED 

PRE-PLEA AGREEMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND YOUR LAWYER IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT. 

(PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) 

 



  
24 

25 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, PLEA HAS BEEN TENDERED. 

THE COURT: I WILL ACCEPT THE PLEA OF GUILTY. WILL 

YOU STATE THE FACTS TO THE COURT, MR. WRIGHT? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, IF THIS CASE HAD GONE TO 

TRIAL WE WOULD EXPECT THE FACTS TO SHOW THAT ON THE DATE LISTED 

IN THE INDICTMENT THE DEFENDANT ALONG WITH THREE OTHER PERSONS   WERE AT THE ART CENTER MARTA STATION. THEY APPARENTLY HAD, 

WERE RIDING IN AN ELEVATOR WITH ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL. AS A 

RESULT TWO OF THEM BLOCKED THE DOOR AND TWO OF THEM ATTEMPTED 

TO TAKE THE MAN'S WALLET OUT OF HIS POCKET. THREE OF THEM RAN 

AND GOT AWAY. THIS DEFENDANT WENT DOWN INTO THE MARTA STATION 

AND WAS IDENTIFIED BY THE VICTIM AND ARRESTED BY THE POLICE 

OFFICER AS BEING A PERSON WHO ATTEMPTED TO TAKE THE VICTIM'S 

WALLET. THE DEFENDANT WAS ARRESTED AND GAVE THE OFFICER SOME 

INFORMATION CONCERNING THE OTHER PERSONS BUT NO ARRESTS WERE 

MADE PURSUANT TO THE INFORMATION HE GAVE TO THE OFFICERS. 

THOSE ARE SUBSTANTIALLY THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES 

OF THE CASE. 

THE COURT: ARE THE FACTS STATED BY THE DISTRICT 

ATTORNEY CORRECT, MR. ZILLAMON? 

THE DEFENDANT: YES, SIR. 

THE COURT: HAS THE STATE ENTERED INTO A PRE-PLEA 

AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYER? 

MR. WRIGHT: YOUR HONOR, BASED ON OUR NEGOTIATIONS 

MS. BORSUK AND I HAVE AGREED THAT MR. ZILLAMON BECAUSE OF HIS 

 



158 

24 

25 

  

AGE PROBABLY SHOULD BE IN THE TESTING TO DETERMINE WHETHER 

DODGE OR A HALFWAY HOUSE WOULD BE A BETTER ALTERNATIVE FOR HIM. 

THE COURT: - ALL RIGHT. I WILL ACCEPT HIS PLEA OF 

GUILTY AND ASK HIM TO REPORT BACK TO THIS COURT FOR SENTENCING 

ON AUGUST 19 AT NINE THIRTY. 

THE CLERK: JUDGE, WILL HAVE TO BE ON THE 

TWENTY-SIXTH. 

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT, AUGUST 26, NINE THIRTY, 

 



  

  

    
  

  

  

  
CERTIFICATE 
  

STATE OF GEORGIA, 

COUNTY OF FULTON: 

I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING IS A   TRUE, COMPLETE AND CORRECT TRANSCRIPT OF THE PROCEEDINGS 

TAKEN DOWN BY ME IN THE CASE AFORESAID. 

THIS CERTIFICATION IS EXPRESSLY WITHDRAWN AND 

DENIED UPON THE DISASSEMBLY OR PHOTOCOPYING OF THE 

FOREGOING TRANSCRIPT, OR ANY PART THEREOF INCLUDING 

EXHIBITS, UNLESS SAID DISASSEMBLY OR PHOTOCOPYING IS DONE 

BY THE UNDERSIGNED OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER AND ORIGINAL   
SIGNATURE AND SEAL IS ATTACHED THERETO. 

THIS, THE oA34ADAY OF lL nein ; 1907. 
J 

Irae. [2 Int ellanel 

  

  

MARY KA. MC LELLAND, A-257 
OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER 
ATLANTA JUDICIAL CIRCUIT 

 



% - - A BRE a ~ ge 
SFSISIGAIN. PLT F.8D Sheba Uae Rw. IL ~Si RUPLSIE. Ig Sy a ——— An ee ee FEA Pn 

  —— ian tee   

AFFIDA . AND WARRANT FOR ARREST OF PRO: IONER ~~" 
STATE OF SE0R0IA FULTON COUN1SUPERIORCOURT 

  

gE NUMBER: A-99174 
BEN WRIGHT CHARGE: y ¢.c.s.A. 
GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY 

: STUYVESANT M. REID i 
Personally appeared , who, being duly 

sworn on oath deposes and says that BEN WRIGHT was 
placed on probation by this Court on the 5TH dayof AUGUST 1988, 
upon the charge of vV.G.C.S.A 

and that to the best of affiant's knowledge and belief said defendant has 
sipge viplated the. terms of probation in the following manner: FAILURE TO REPORT AND 

That affiant makes this affidavit for the purposes of obtaining a warrant 
for the arrest of said probationer in order that (he or she) may be returned 
to this Court to answer this charge of violation of bati 2 

TUYWESANT M. REID, P.O. I 

   

  

  

to and subscribed before me this 

i dgy of NOVEMBRER,9 82 

    

      

  

  

Notary Public, Fulton County, Georgia 
My Commission Expires Mar. 30, 1998 

  

Notary Public 

GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY 
TO ALL AND SINGULAR, THE SHERIFFS, DEPUTY SHERIFFS, AND ALL OTHER DULY 
CONSTITUTED ARRESTING OFFICERS. 
Affidavit having been made that the above named defendant has violated the terms of 
probation, you are hereby commanded to arrest said defendant, to safely keep (him or her) 
until (he or she) may be brought before this Court to answer the charge of violation of 
probation as set forth in the foregoing affidavit. 

THE SENTENCE OF THE DEFENDANT IS HEREBY TOLLED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF OCGA 

SEC. 428-36 (a), AND THE SIGNING OF THIS ORDER. 

This the 1p a ai z oS : NHR Qisanaina 
JUDGE, 
SUPERIOR E00 r OF YOON county 

  

  

  

GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY: 

DILIGENT SEARCH MADE AND DEFENDANT, 

  

  

        

BEN WRIGHT 

NOT TO BE FOUND IN THE JURISDICTION OF FILEDINOFFICE ~~ NOLTQREF 

ci, NOV 2 ae THIS 4,2 / DAY or fb 0 17 

OY SHER — PROBATION OFFICER 

FULTON COUNTY GEGRGIA 

ec a 
' ' fot : ' ' 

- : 2 do ee 
(&] ' ' ' ' ' ' 
& ' ' ' ' " ' 

2 : yx) 
T ©. RB 7] ' o [J ' ] ' 

3 5 2 (|[E% : bor 
N We : SE 

ANZ 23 SNE 
i pa Ee : < = fo: ' ' 

3 z FE 
Q ; = » = a bias     
   

 



  

' : 

i 

«| 
\ | 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY 

STATE OF GEORGIA 

THE STATE 

Plaintiff 

VS. 

BEN WRIGHT, 

Defendant 

NOTICE 

2 So 

INDICTMENT No. / - 5 %/ 7 

OF APPEARANCE 

COMES NOW Charles W. Boyle and enters his name as 

attorney of record for the 

action. 

FRANKLIN, MORAN & BOYLE 

852 Gordon Street S.W. 
Atlanta, Georgia 30310 
(404) 752-5757 

£1LED IN OFFICE 

ET Ea 
BE 2 2 1988 

DEPUTY Chen L
on | COURT 

FULTON COUNTY GEORGIA 

  

defendant in the above-styled 

Respectfully submitted, 

(ih og 
CHARLES W.(BOVYLE 
 



  

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

This is to certify that I have this day served upon 

opposing counsel a true and correct copy of the within and 

foregoing NOTICE OF APPEARANCE, by hand delivering a copy of 

same to the Assistant District Attorney. 

This 15th day of July, 1988. 

VA 
CHARLES W. BQYLE 
  

FRANKLIN, MORAN & BOYLE 

852 Gordon Street S.W. 
Atlanta, Georgia 30310 
(404) 752-5757 

 



  

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY 

STATE OF GEORGIA 

THE STATE : 

VS Jf 
BEN WRIGHT, : INDICTMENT NO. # od 7 

Defendant 

BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS 

The search of defendant’s home is an illegal search 

pursuant to an illegal search warrant. It is well settled that 

rumors or information from unidentified persons cannot form a 

basis for search warrants. Thornton v. State, 125 Ga.App. 374. 

See also Courson v. State, 125 Ga.App. 373. See also State v. | 
  

Brown, 366 SE.2d 816 (Ga. App 1988 Case No. 75322) attached hereto! 

as Exhibit "a." 

Respectfully submitted, 

2, 
CHARLES W. Dor 
  

. FRANKLIN, MORAN & BOYLE | 
852 Gordon Street S.W. 
Atlanta, Georgia 30310 
(404) 752-5757 

  

  

  

FILED IN OFFICE 5, 1% 
fl --:2121 - 108” 

A | 

   



St B 

ty 
Z.. RLTTES 
A, 

: 

     

H SIRT OY I VEER 
. Rl 

yo 

 ERMBIT SA 

  

RE 
Fg 

816 Ga. 

to suppress, which the trial court denied. 

After the condemnation hearing, appellant 
filed a motion for new trial, which was also 

denied. Appellant contends that the trial 
court erred in failing to grant his motions 

because the seizure was made without 

probable cause and not pursuant to the 
statute. Our review of the record reveals 
that the statute subsection about which 

appellant complains, OCGA 
§ 16-13-49(a)1), does not apply here. In 

this case, the money was taken and re- 
tained by the authorities only after appel- 
lant denied knowledge and ownership of 

the funds. The testimony offered at the 

condemnation hearing showed that the 

money was held because appellant denied 

that it belonged to him. Under these cir- 

cumstances, no “seizure incident to an ar- 

rest” occurred; at the time of the initial 

taking, about which appellant complains, 

the authorities merely took possession of 

property that had no apparent or admitted 

owner. “[T]he constitutional protection of 

the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments 

does not apply to property which has been 

abandoned. [Cit.]’ Williams v. State, 171 

Ga.App. 546(2), 320 S.E.2d 389 (1984). 

[2] Appellant also argues that the mon- 

ey was seized without probable cause, and 
again we need not decide the exact issue 

raised. Assuming arguendo that the sei- 

zure did take place at the time of his arrest 

as appellant contends, it is axiomatic that 

he had no standing to contest the seizure 

since he consented to the search and disa- 

vowed ownership of the money. Ramsey 

v. State, 183 Ga.App. 48(1), 357 S.E.2d 869 

(1987). The trial court did not err in mak- 

ing its rulings. 

Judgment affirmed. 

BANKE, PJ., and CARLEY, J., 
concur specially. 

BANKE, Presiding Judge, concurring 

specially. 

[3] An undercover agent from Michigan 

testified that in July of 1986, some two 

months after the seizure occurred, the ap- 
pellant confided to him that, “several 
months earlier,” the police in Dalton, Geor- 

gia, had seized $65,500 in funds which he 

* RESPYT a BYORI LE CK ~- 

366 SOUTH EASTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES 

had obtained from the sale of some ‘bales 

of marijuana.” Thus, there was evidence 

to support the trial court's conclusion that 
the funds were subject to forfeiture pursu- 
ant to OCGA § 16-13-49. The seizure it- 
self having been proper for the reasons 
stated in the majority decision, I therefore 
concur in the affirmance of the trial court's 
judgment. 

I am authorized to state that Judge CAR- 
LEY joins in this special concurrence. 

The STATE 

Vv. 

BROWN et al. 

No. 756322. 

Court of Appeals of Georgia. 

March 2, 1988. 

Defendants were arrested and indicted 
for alleged violations of Controlled Sub- 

stances Act and Dangerous Drug Act. .The 
Richmond Superior Court, Pickett, J. 
granted defendants’ motion to suppress ev- 

idence seized during search of their home, 
and State appealed. The Court of Appeals, 
Benham, J., held that information supplied 

by anonymous tipster that drug activity 

was taking place at search warrant location 

and police officers’ independent observa- 

tions of activity consistent with drug sales 
at location were insufficient to supply req- 
uisite probable cause necessary for is- 
suance of search warrant. 

Affirmed. 

Banke, P.J., filed opinion concurring 
specially, in which Carley, J., joined. 

1. Searches and Seizures ¢=118 
" Conclusory statement contained in ap- 

plication for search warrant that anony- 

——. — 

  

  2121 7x 11 

mous tipster v 

vided insufficic 

termine that i 

credible so as 

sion that proba 

search premise 

sought. (Perl 

concurring 8p 

Amend. 4. 

2. Searches ar 

Lack of in 
davit as to ba: 

information ths 

ed at home fo 

sought provide 

ing of probabl 

of search warr 

two Judges spe 

Const.Amend. 

3. Drugs and 

Observatio 

traffic pattern 

cion that contr: 

ises and is in: 

issuance of sea 

J., with two J 

U.S.C.A. Const 

4. Drugs. and : 

Probable c: 

search warrant 

cers’ independe 
at which ano 

contraband was 

tion amounted 

vation of activi’ 

fic pattern. ( 

Judges specia 

Const.Amend. - 

Sam B. Sible; 
Guest, Asst. D 

. Martin C. Pu 

BENHAM, J 

Following th: 

search their ho 

and indicted fo 

Georgia Contro. 

Georgia Dange 
court granted a 

  

 



  

of some ‘bales 

e was evidence 

conclusion that 

rfeiture pursu- 

The seizure it- 

or the reasons 

ion, I therefore 

“he trial court's 

iat Judge CAR- 

ncurrence. 

Jeorgia. 

-d and indicted 
trolled Sub- 
rug Act. The 

Pickett, J., 

0 suppress ev- 
Of their home, 

rt of Appeals, 

ation supplied 
drug activity 

rant location 

dent observa- 

ith drug sales 

to supply req- 

ssary for is- 

n concurring 

, joined. 

°118 

tained in ap- 

that anony- 

  

  

RA
S 
S
R
S
T
 Te 

yi
 

  
| 

STATE v. BROWN Ga. 817 
Cite as 366 S.E2d 816 (Ga.App. 1988) 

mous tipster was ‘concerned citizen” pro- 

vided insufficient basis upon which to de- 
termine that informant’s information was 
credible so as to support magistrate’s deci- 
sion that probable cause had been shown to 

search premises for which warrant was 

sought. (Per Benham, J., with two Judges 

concurring specially) U.S.C.A. Const. 
Amend. 4. 

2. Searches and Seizures ¢=118 

Lack of information contained in affi- 

davit as to basis for anonymous tipster’s 
information that contraband might be locat- 
ed at home for which search warrant was 
sought provided insufficient basis for find- 

ing of probable cause to support issuance 
of search warrant. (Per Benham, J., with 

two Judges specially EoncurTing, > 1. S. C.A. 
Const.Amend. 4. 

3. Drugs and Narcotics &188(2) 

Observation of activity that. fits drug 
traffic pattern raises at most mere suspi- 
cion that contraband is being kept on prem- 
ises and is insufficient cause to support 

issuance of search warrant. (Per Benham, 
J., with two Judges specially concurring.) 
U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 4. 

4. Drugs and Narcotics &188(7) 

Probable cause to support issuance of 

search warrant was not supplied by offi- 
cers’ independent investigation of location 
at which anonymous informant claimed 

contraband was being sold where investiga- 
tion amounted to nothing more than obser- 

vation of activity that resembled drug traf- 
fic. pattern. (Per Benham, J., with two 

Judges specially concurring.) U.S.C.A. 

Const.Amend. 4. 

Sam B. Sibley, Jr., Dist. Atty., George N. 

Guest, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellant. 

Martin C. Puetz, Augusta, for appellees. 

BENHAM, Judge.’ 

Following the execution of a warrant to 

search their home, appellees were arrested 
and indicted for alleged violations of the 

Georgia Controlled Substances Act and the 

Georgia Dangerous Drug Act. The trial 
court granted appellees’ motion to suppress 

  

the evidence seized during the search of 
their home, and the State appeals from that 

ruling. See OCGA § 5-7-1(4). 

The trial court ordered suppression of 

the evidence after concluding that the affi- 

davit executed in support of the application 

of the warrant did not set forth sufficient 

facts to establish probable cause to believe 

that marijuana and cocaine were being kept 

at the Brown residence. In the affidavit 
the trial court found deficient, the affiant 

officer averred that he and another mem- 
ber of the Narcotics Squad of the Augusta 
Police Department “received information 
from a concerned citizen that a large quan- 
tity of Marihuana and some Cocaine is be- 
ing kept in [the Browns’] dwelling. During 

the past two days these officers have had 
this dwelling under observation during the 

day and night, mostly at night, and have 
observed numerous black males and fe- 

males go to this dwelling staying only two 

to three minutes. The officers also have 

observed Carmella Brown meet some of 

these individuals at the front door and give 
them small manila [envelopes] suspected of 

containing marihuana, for unknown 

amount of cash which has been seen ex- 

changed. Some of these individuals have 

been identified by the officers as being 

known drug users and abusers. Officers 
have also seen some individuals leaving 

this dwelling enter their vehicles and open 

what appeared [to be] a manila envelope 

which was in their hand upon leaving the 

dwelling and after a few minutes light 

what is suspected of being a handrolled 
marihuana cigarette and then depart the 

area.” 

1. The magistrate had as his task “to 

make a practical, common-sense decision 
whether, given all the circumstances set 

forth in the affidavit before him, including 

the ‘veracity’ and ‘basis of knowledge’ of 

persons supplying hearsay information, 

there is a fair probability that contraband 
or evidence of a crime will be found in a 
particular place.” Illinois v. Gates, 462 

U.S. 218, 238, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 2332, 76 L.Ed. 
2d 527 (1983); State v. Stephens, 252 Ga. 

181, 182, 811 S.E.2d 823 (1984). We begin 
our review of the issues presented by this 

 



818 Ga. 

case with the acknowledgement that we 

“should apply a deferential standard of re- 

view [of the magistrate’s determination of 

probable cause] in order to further the 

Fourth Amendment's strong preference for 
searches conducted pursuant to a war- 
rant.” State v. Fultz, 171 Ga.App. 886, 
888, 321 S.E.2d 381 (1984). However, the 

fact that a warrant was. issued and the 
search conducted pursuant thereto does not 
cause us to terminate our review. We 

must determine, among other things, 
whether the hearsay information supplied 

to the affiant, coupled with the affiant's 
personal observations, presented a fair 
probability that contraband would be found 
at the Brown residence. 

[1,2] 2. As was earlier stated, the 

magistrate must consider the veracity and 
basis of knowledge of persons supplying 

hearsay information to an affiant officer. 

The affidavit in the case at bar contained 
no information about the basis of the infor- 
mant's knowledge or reasons why the in- 

formant should be believed. In effect, the 

investigation which culminated in the ar- 

rest of appellees had as its inception infor- 

mation received by the affiant officer over 

the telephone from an anonymous tipster 
described by the affiant as a “concerned 
citizen.” ‘This court has always given the 
concerned citizen informer a preferred sta- 
tus insofar as testing the credibility of his 
information [Cits.]’ Whitten v. State, 174 

Ga.App. 867, 868, 331 S.E.2d 912 (1985). 
However, before an anonymous tipster can 

be elevated to the status of “concerned 

citizen,” thereby gaining entitlement to the 
preferred status regarding credibility con- 
comitant with that title, there must be 
placed before the magistrate facts from 

which it can be concluded that the anony- 
mous tipster is, in fact, a “concerned citi- 

zen.” See Cichetti v. State, 181 Ga.App. 
272(1), 351 S.E.2d 707 (1986) (affiant per- 
sonally knew the informant to be truthful, 
gainfully employed, and without a criminal 

record); Alewine v. State, 180 Ga.App. 679, 

350 S.E.2d 46 (1986) (affiant as well as the 

issuing justice of the peace knew the infor- 

mant, who was a long-time area resident, a 

truthful businessman, and without a crimi- 

nal record); Futch v. State, 178 Ga.App. 

366 SOUTH EASTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES 

115(1), 342 S.E.2d 493 (1986) (informant 
described as mature, regularly employed 

person who displayed a truthful demeanor, 

had a personal connection to the suspect, 

and made a personal appearance before the 
magistrate); Whitten v. State, supra (in- 

formant known to the affiant for more 

than three years and described as a ma- 
ture, regularly-employed family man with 
no criminal record); State v. Hockman, 171 

Ga.App. 504, 320 S.E.2d 241 (1984) (infor- - 

mant known to the affiant for more than 

four years and described as a mature, gain- 

fully-employed person with no criminal 
record who had previously given. informa- 
tion which led to the arrest and conviction 

of three drug felons); Keller v. State, 169 

Ga.App. 596, 314 S.E.2d 255 (1984) (infor- 

mant known to the affiant for six months 

and described as a mature, regularly-em- 
ployed, church-going family man); GaDon- 
na v. State, 164 Ga.App. 582(1), 298 S.E.2d 

556 (1982) (informants known to the affiant 

and described as reliable, successful, re- 

spected businessmen of the community); 

and Page v. State, 136 Ga.App. 807, 222 
S.E.2d 661 (1975) (informant known to the 

affiant for over a year and described as a 
mature, truthful, gainfully-employed, re- 
spected person in the community with no 
known criminal record). An informants 

veracity, reliability, and basis of knowledge 

are “highly relevant in determining the val- 
ue of his report” and while these elements 

are not ‘entirely separate and independent 

elements to be rigidly exacted in every 

case,” they are “closely intertwined issues 

that may usefully illuminate the common- 

sense, practical question whether there is 

‘probable cause’ to believe that contraband 

or evidence is located in a particular place.” 
Illinois v. Gates, supra, 462 U.S. at 230, 

103 S.Ct. at 2328. The affidavit in the case 
at bar contained no information from which 

it could be gleaned that the tipster was, in 

fact, a “concerned citizen.” The magis- 

trate was given nothing other than the 

affiant’s conclusory statement that the tip- 

ster was a concerned citizen. That will not 

suffice. See State v. Jackson, 166 Ga.App. 

671(2), 305 S.E.2d 417 (1983). Therefore, 
the informant was not entitled to a pre- 

oh ed 

EX 

d
m
a
 

  TT Ty pp —— 
Lr EARL 

2121 TH   

ferred 

ity of 
of inf¢ 

basis « 

matior 

In poi 
at the 

mant 

could 

found 

admitt 

a susp 

3. 

the afi 

depenc 
“were 

did no 

lish pr 

na anc 

home. 

[3,4 

ner ob 

whom 

and al 

for she 

pellee 

manila 

Some 0 

vehicle. 

velopes 
cigaret 

activity 

raises 

traban« 

does r 

search 

Ga.Apr 
McGui 

S.E.2d 

Ga.App 
Compa: 

110(1), 
affidavi 

informs 

the pre 

officer : 

of the * 

er seen 

them as 

ously “ 

In su 

that the 

 



  

  

3 ¢ 

(1986) (informant 

-egularly employed 

truthful demeanor, 

ion to the suspect, 

yearance before the 

». State, supra (in- 

affiant for more 

lescribed as a ma- 

d family man with 

te v. Hockman, 171 

1 241 (1984) (infor- - 

iant for more than 

1 as a mature, gain- ~~ 

with no criminal 
sly given informa- 
rest and conviction 

{eller v. State, 169 

1 255 (1984) (infor- 

ant for six months 

ture, regularly-em- 

nily man); GaDon- 
. 582(1), 298 S.E.2d 

nown to the affiant 

le, successful, re- 

f the community); 
Ga.App. 807, 222 

mant known to the 

and described as a 

‘ully-employed, re- 
ommunity with no 

An informant’s 

basis of knowledge 

etermining the val- 

hile these elements 

te and independent 

exacted in every 

intertwined issues 

inate the common- 

1 whether there is 

ve that contraband 

a particular place.” 

., 462 U.S. at 230, 

ffidavit in the case 

mation from which 

the tipster was, in 
zen.” The magis- 
'g other than the 

ement that the tip- 

zen. That will not 

skson, 166 Ga.App. 

1983). Therefore, 

entitled to a pre- 

  

L
e
d
 

, 
, 

P
P
 
J
P
L
 N

TE
 
T
I
F
 

WO
ST

I 

  

BUSINESS RESOURCES v. GENERAL AMUSEMENTS Ga. 819 
Cite as 366 S.E2d 819 (Ga.App. 1988) 

ferred status insofar as testing the credibil- 
ity of his information. The complete lack 

of information about the informant and the 

basis of his knowledge relegated the infor- 
mation he supplied to the status of rumor. 

In point of fact, the affiant officer testified 

at the suppression hearing that the infor- 

mant gave no facts from which the officer 

could conclude that contraband might be 

found in the Brown home, and the officer 
admitted the information amounted to “just 

a suspicion” on the part of the informant. 

8. The trial court also concluded that 
the affiant’s statements concerning the in- 
dependent investigation conducted by him 

“were conclusory statements at best” that 

did not set forth sufficient facts to estab- 

lish probable cause to believe that marijua- 

na and cocaine were present at appellees’ 
home. : : 

[3,4] The affiant officer and his part- 

ner observed “numerous” people, some of 
whom were described as known drug users 

and abusers, visiting appellee's residence 
for short periods of time during which ap- 

pellee Carmella Brown gave them small 
manila envelopes in exchange for cash. 

Some of the visitors, upon re-entering their 
vehicles, appeared to open the manila en- 

velopes and, several minutes later, light a 

cigarette and leave. The observation of 

activity that fits a “drug traffic pattern” 
raises at most a mere suspicion that con- 
traband is being kept on the premise, and 

does not amount to probable cause to 
search the home. State v. Porter, 167 

Ga.App. 293, 306 S.E.2d 377 (1983); 
McGuire v. State, 136 Ga.App. 271(2), 220 

S.E.2d 769 (1975); Maxwell v. State, 127 

Ga.App. 168, 170, 193 S.E.2d 14 (1972). 

Compare Borders v. State, 173 Ga.App. 

110(1), 325 S.E.2d 626 (1984) (where the 
affidavit contained “specific drug-related 
information concerning those who lived on 

the premises.”) At the hearing, the affiant 
officer admitted he did not know the names 
of the “known drug abusers” and had nev- 
er seen them before, and then described 

them as people his partner had seen previ- 

ously “in drug areas.” 

In sum, we concur with the trial court 

that the affidavit presented to the magis- 

trate did not contain sufficient information 

to conclude that there was a fair probabili- 

ty that contraband would be found on ap- 
pellees’ premises. 

Judgment affirmed. 

BANKE, PJ., and CARLEY, J, 

concur specially. 

BANKE, Presiding Judge, concurring 
specially. 

The trial judge's decision to grant the 

motion to suppress was based, in part, on 
the following finding of fact: “[The affi- 

ant’s] testimony is not credible in that he 
was unable to corroborate, in any manner, 

his testimony of when and where the sur- 

veillance took place and the number of 
individuals who were allegedly seen going 

to and from [the defendant's residence).” 

The trial judge sits as the ultimate trier 

of fact at a hearing on a motion to sup- 

press, and his findings will not be disturbed 

if there is any evidence to support them. 

State v. Swift, 232 Ga. 535, 536, 207 S.E.2d 
459 (1974). “Credibility of witnesses, reso- 

lution of any conflict or inconsistency, and 

weight to be accorded testimony [are] sole- 

ly the province of the judge on a motion to 

suppress.” Rogers v. State, 155 Ga.App. 

685, 686, 272 S.E.2d 549 (1980). Conse- 
quently, I agree that the grant of the mo- 
tion to suppress should be affirmed. 

I am authorized to state that Judge CAR- 

LEY joins in this special concurrence. 

BUSINESS RESOURCES, INC. et al. 

v. 

GENERAL AMUSEMENTS, INC. et al 

No. 75525. 

Court of Appeals of Georgia. 

March 3, 1988. 

Owners of video games brought action 
against company which agreed to place and 

          

WEP SNL, vw yg 

2191 no 114 
-— 

nd 4 

wD 

     



  

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

This is to certify that I have on this day served upon 

the Assistant District Attorney of Fulton County, a true and 

correct copy of the within and foregoing MOTION TO SUPPRESS, 

STATEMENT OF FACTS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS, 

and BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS by hand 

| delivering a copy of same. 

This the 15th day of July, 1988. 

(HY il 
CHARLES W. BOY 
Attorney for endant 

| 

  

FRANKLIN, MORAN & BOYLE 
852 Gordon Street S.W. 
Atlanta, Georgia 30310 
(404) 752-5757 

- 2:2121 : - 

 



  

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY 

STATE OF GEORGIA 

- THE STATE : 

cr} FR vs. : INDICTMENT NO. +4 _ rset 

| BEN WRIGHT : 

Defendant : 

ON FO RY 

COMES NOW BEN WRIGHT, Defendant in the above-styled 

| indictment and moves the Court to require the State through the 

| Assistant District Attorney to produce at trial of the 

above-styled case, and in any and all non jury hearings in the 

~ above-styled case the following: 

Qlott™n 
FILED IN OFFICE 

H 
| 

JUL 201988 
120 wr se 

1) Copy of all reports and memoranda connected with 
the said charges against the named Defendant. 

2) All written statements of witnesses in possession 
of the prosecutor relating to the charges against the 
named Defendant in the above-styled indictment, as well 
as all statements relating to any other Defendant named 
in the above-styled indictment. 

3) Names, addresses and telephone numbers and 
whereabouts of all the witnesses to be called by the 
State in the trial of the named Defendant, and any 
other Defendant named in the above-styled indictment. 

4) Any and all tape recordings, video recordings, and 
or telephonic conversations intercepted by any law 
enforcement gathered from the Defendant during the 
course of this investigation. 

5) Statements of all persons including memoranda, 
summaries or recordings of such statements of any 

id ( <“~person, made to an : : ’ Y law enforcement officer or the 
oepOTY EEK Suipeaion Eola investigative staff of any prosecutor in any way 

connected with the above-styled indictment. 
FULTOH COUMTY CLORGIA 

   



  

A 6) Results of all reports of any scientific tests or 
experiments or studies made in connection with the 
above-styled case and all copies of such reports. 

7) All fingerprint documents and reports relating to 
the crime alleged to have been committed by the named 
Defendant. 

8) Copies of all search warrants, any affidavits 
applied for in the above-styled case whether said 
search warrants were executed or not executed, and 
whether or not upon execution any contraband was found. 

9) The full names and addresses of all persons who 
have given information to the prosecuting attorney for 
law enforcement officers relating to the arrest of the 
Defendant and the charges against him. 

10) The criminal records, and any list or summary 
reflecting criminal records of all persons whom the 
State intends to call as a witness in the trial of the 
above-named Defendant. 

11) All written and recorded statements and all 
summaries or memoranda of any oral or written 
statements made by the Defendant, and all other 
defendant named in the above-styled indictment. 

12) All diagrams, sketches, and pictures which have 
been made by or shown to any witness or prospective 
witness in the above-styled case. 

13) A detailed description of all physical items other 
than documents and pictures which the prosecutor 
anticipates using in the trial of the above-named 
Defendant, and the exact place where and under whose 
custody such items are being held. 

14) Any summaries prepared by any police agencies or 
by the District Attorney of any tape recordings of 
Defendant in the relation to the above-styled charges. 
This Motion is brought pursuant and within the context 

of Brady v. Maryland, 373 US 83 (1968) and Banks v. State, 235 

| Ga. 121 (1975). 

 



  

WHEREFORE, Defendant moves that the State be required 

to produce all said documents and other evidence referred to 

above. 

| Respectfully submitted, 

C2.5C 
CHARLES W. 
Attorney for iat 

  

  FRANKLIN, MORAN & BOYLE 
852 Gordon Street, S. W. 
Atlanta, Georgia 30310 
(404) 752-5757 

| 222121 :::704 

    
 



    

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY 

THE STATE 

i VS. 

BEN WRIGHT 

Defendant 

STATE OF GEORGIA 

INDICTMENT NO. 

DEMAND FOR COPIES OF THE DEFENDANT’S STATEMENTS 

AND SCIENTIFIC REPORTS 

COMES NOW the above-styled Defendant, and makes this 

demand for a copy of any and all scientific reports, and any and 

all statements of the Defendant, whether or not exculpatory, to 

be provided to him not later than ten (10) days before the date 

of trial pursuant 0.C.G.A. Section 17-7-210 and 0.C.G.A. Section 

17-7-211. 

  

FRANKLIN, MORAN & BOYLE 
852 Gordon Street, S. W. 
Atlanta, Georgia 30310 
(404) 752-5757 

  

[FILED IN OFFICE ~   

              
206 | 

Respectfully submitted, 

CL fir 
CHARLES W. BOYLE 
Attorney for Defendant 

  

— 

22121 TAZ 705 

  

 



  

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

THIS IS TO CERTIFY that I have this day served upon the 

District Attorney’s Office of Fulton County, with a true and 

correct copy of the within and foregoing pleadings by hand 

. delivery, listed as follows: 

| Motion For Discovery; 

| Demand For Copy Of Indictment And List Of 

i Witnesses. 

I This 15th day of July, 1988. 

Cl wh 
CHARLES W. BOYLE > 
  

FRANKLIN, MORAN & BOYLE 

852 Gordon Street S.W. 
- Atlanta, Georgia 30310 

(404) 752-5757 

— 9421 +706 

 



  

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY 

STATE OF GEORGIA 

THE STATE : 

Vs : 

| BEN WRIGHT, : INDICTMENT No. [I - TG F/ Zr 

/ | Defendant 3 

FILED IN QFFICE ; | 
MOTION TO SUPPRESS | 

JUL 201588 COMES NOW the above named Defendant before arraignment 

OE ata en this, his Motion To Suppress, and shows the Court the | 

Lasik I lagine facts: 

1, 

That on April 27, 1988, the Defendant and his son, 

Stanley Wright, were arrested at his home located at 259 

Richardson Street, Apt. 210, Atlanta, Georgia by officers of the 

|| City of Atlanta Police Department. 

| 2. 
I 
8] 

That said Magistrate did not have any probable cause, 

or reasonable objective grounds for executing the search warrant. 

Specifically, the affidavit is totally devoid of any verification 

of the tip received by the concerned citizen and no additional 

information was provided to the issuing judge. 

3. 

As a result the Defendant was illegally detained and 

arrested, and Defendant’s home was searched illegally and 

| Defendant was held in illegal custody because said search al 

was issued without any probable cause. 2:2121 +1077 
\ 

  

  

 



  

  

4. 

That the police illegally seized certain items, money, 

contraband, things, and testimony from the Defendant, and from the 

home of defendant in violation of the Defendant’s rights under the 

Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution, and | 

| also in violation of Article I, Section I, Paragraph (13), of the | 

| Constitution of the State of Georgia. | 

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that a hearing be held on | 

his Motion; that the Court issue an order suppressing any article,   

  

| 
{| contraband, thing, or testimony obtained as a result of this 

|| illegal arrest, illegal search, illegal seizure, and all |   
| subsequent investigation, the fruits of knowledge of which were 

| the results of said illegal actions of the police; and for such 

relief as this Honorable Court may deem mete and just 

Respectfully submitted, 

| CHARLES W. @OYLE 
| Attorney for Defendant 

  

' FRANKLIN, MORAN & BOYLE 
852 Gordon Street, S.W. 

Atlanta, Georgia 30310 
(404) 752-5757 

  

 



  

Ann a ion A A TN EL $A ' surg FRR a 4 AFA     

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY 

STATE OF GEORGIA 

THE STATE : 

| VS : 

| BEN WRIGHT, . INDICTMENT No. A 77) TY 

| Defendant 

STATEMENT OF FACTS IN SUPPORT OF 

I ‘8S M ON 8 8 

The search warrant is attached hereto as Exhibit "A." 

The search warrant concerns a concerned citizen who stated that 

Ben Wright was selling cocaine in his house. The officer did 

with a number of other police officers with shotguns and found 

approximately one ounce of marijuana and some money which they 

© seized. There was no cocaine found despite the affidavit in 

"support of the search warrant. There was no verification that 

there was any cocaine trafficking taking place. 

Respectfully submitted, 

(Uw ZL 
CHARLES W. BLA 
  

ie 7 . FRANKLIN, MORAN & BOYLE 

1 852 Gordon Street S.W. 
il i re 

| HT Tet 3o310 2121 22: 109 
| 
1] 

|| nothing to verify the information and broke into Ben Wright’s home| 

  

  

 



  

  
  

STATE OF GEORGIA 
FULTON COUNTY 
CALENDAR NOTICE 

YOU MUST BE PRESENT AND MAY BE REPRE- 

SENTED BY A LAWYER. IF YOU ARE FREE ON 

APPEARANCE BOND AND FAIL TO APPEAR, YOUR 

BOND WILL BE SUBJECT TO FORFEITURE AND A 

WARRANT MAY ISSUE FOR YOUR RE-ARREST.     STATE VS. 
  

    
WRIGHTe BEN 

IN ; DICTMENT NO A99174 141 

A RED TO: 
THIS CASE IS SET UPON A DEFENDANT 8 REQUIRED 10 

(1) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (572 2 
YOUR BONDSMAN. AND THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 

JLEA AND ARRAI stiri 5, 1988 OF ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS: 
uss [J (2) MAINTAIN CONTINUING COMMUNICATION WITH YOUR LAWYER, 

Cron 30 AM , FULTON COUNTY COURTHOUSE, IF YOU HAVE ONE: 

ONORABLE (3) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (572 - 3107) 
LUTHER ALYERSON OF THE NAME OF YOUR LAWYER: 

JUDGE, FULTON SUPERIOR COURT, CRIMINAL (4) BE PRESENT WITH YOUR LAWYER AT THE TIME AND PLACE 
DIVISION INDICATED ON THIS NOTICE; 

(5) BE AWARE THAT FAILURE TO APPEAR WITH YOUR LAWYER 
THIS 18 DAY OF JULYe 1988 ON THE DATE SET MAY RESULT IN YOUR BEING FOUND IN 

CONTEMPT OF COURT; 

= BARBARA J. PRICE (6) NOTIFY THE COURT IMMEDIATELY IF IT SHOULD APPEAR THAT 
CLERK OF SUPERIOR'COURT HE UPON TRIAL OR ARRAIGNMENT YOU MAY NOT BE REPRESENTED 

ADDRESSEE: ; Se BY A LAWYER: 
2% (7) BRING THIS NOTICE TO COURT ON THE REQUIRED DATE. 

A99174—A 

BORSUKg LYNNE -¥ em 
PUBLIC DEFENDER a 

  

    
  

L > A ' " ue aa ine ipo La » mew we ’ 

A COPY OF THIS NOTICE IS PERMANENTLY RETAINED IN YOUR CASE FILE 

| 
1 

STATE OF GEORGIA YOU MUST BE PRESENT AND MAY BE REPRE- 

FULTON COUNTY SENTED BY A LAWYER. IF YOU ARE FREE ON 

CALENDAR NOTICE APPEARANCE BOND AND FAIL TO APPEAR, YOUR 
BOND WILL BE SUBJECT TO FORFEITURE AND A 

STATE VS WARRANT MAY ISSUE FOR YOUR RE-ARREST. 
* WRIGHT9 BEN 

INDICTMENT NO. A9917%4 140 

DEFENDANT IS REQUIRED TO: 

THIS CASE IS SET UPON A (1) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION ea 

YOUR BONDSMAN. AND THE UNITED STATES POSTAL VI 

FLEA AND APRA1GNMEN] 5 198 8 OF ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS: 

AUG [) 
AT _ FULTON COUNTY COURTHOUSE. @ SNA Done COMMUNICATION WITH YOUR LAWYER. 

BEFORE THE HONORABLE (3) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (572 - 3107) 

OF THE NAME OF YOUR LAWYER: 

LUTHER .ALVERSON COURT, CRIMINAL (4) BE PRESENT WITH YOUR LAWYER AT THE TIME AND PLACE 

DIVISION INDICATED ON THIS NOTICE: 

(5) BE AWARE THAT FAILURE TO APPEAR WITH YOUR LAWYER 

HS 18 DAY OF JULYe 1988 ON THE DATE SET MAY RESULT IN YOUR BEING FOUND IN 
CONTEMPT OF COURT; 

BARBARA J. PRICE (6) NOTIFY THE COURT IMMEDIATELY IF IT SHOULD APPEAR THAT 

r CLERK OF SUPERIOR COURT = UPON bias x ARRAIGNMENT YOU MAY NOT BE REPRESENTED 

BY A LAWYER: 

ADDRESSES: () BRING THIS NOTICE TO COURT ON THE REQUIRED DATE. 

A99174-D-0 

WRIGHT 9- BEN 

259 RICHARDSON ST. #210 

ATLANTA. 6A 

A COPY OF THIS NOTICE IS PERMANENTLY RETAINED IN YOUR CASE FILE 

  

  

 



STATE OF GEORGIA 
FULTON COUNTY 
CALENDAR NOTICE 

STATE VS. WRIGHT BEN   INDICTMENT NO. 299174 64 

THIS CASE IS SET UPON A 

PLEA AND ARRAIGNMENT 
CALENDAR FOR JULY 8, 1988 
AT  930AM FULTON COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 
BEFORE THE HONORABLE 

LUTHER ALVERSON 
JUDGE, FULTON SUPERIOR COURT, CRIMINAL 

DIVISION 

BARBARA J. PRICE 

CLERK OF SUPERIOR COURT 

ADDRESSEE: 

A99174-D-0 
WRIGHTs BEN rt, 
259 RICHARDSON ST #210 
ATLANTAs GA 

{5 

  

  

YOU MUST BE PRESENT AND MAY BE REPRE- 

SENTED BY A LAWYER. IF YOU ARE FREE ON 

APPEARANCE BOND AND FAIL TO APPEAR, YOUR 

BOND WILL BE SUBJECT TO FORFEITURE AND A 

WARRANT MAY ISSUE FOR YOUR RE-ARREST. 
  

DEFENDANT IS REQUIRED TO: 

(1) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (572 -3107), 
YOUR BONDSMAN. AND THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 
OF ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS: 

(2) MAINTAIN CONTINUING COMMUNICATION WITH YOUR LAWYER, 
IF YOU HAVE ONE: 

(3) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (572 - 3107) 
OF THE NAME OF YOUR LAWYER: 

(4) BE PRESENT WITH YOUR LAWYER AT THE TIME AND PLACE 
INDICATED ON THIS NOTICE: 

(5) BE AWARE THAT FAILURE TO APPEAR WITH YOUR LAWYER 
ON THE DATE SET MAY RESULT IN YOUR BEING FOUND IN 
CONTEMPT OF COURT: 

(6) NOTIFY THE COURT IMMEDIATELY IF IT SHOULD APPEAR THAT 
UPON TRIAL OR ARRAIGNMENT YOU MAY NOT BE REPRESENTED 
BY A LAWYER: 

(7) BRING THIS NOTICE TO COURT ON THE REQUIRED DATE. 

  

A COPY OF THIS NOTICE IS PERMANENTLY RETAINED IN YOUR CASE FILE 

STATE OF GEORGIA 
FULTON COUNTY 
CALENDAR NOTICE 

STATE VS. WRIGHTs BEN 

INDICTMENT NO. 142 
A99174 

THIS CASE IS SET UPON A 

ARRAIGNMENT 
kbd NEx AUGUST 55 1988 1 
AT , FULTON COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 
BEFORE THE HONORABLE 

JoBIE EB. Ak LEBABE counr. criminaL 
DIVISION 
THIS DAY OF 

18 JULYs 1988 

BARBARA J. PRICE 

- CLERK OF SUPERIOR COURT 

ADDRESSEE: 

A99124-B 
ATLANTIC, BONDING COD 
227 PEACHTREE ST SMW STE 1 
ATLANTA GA 30303 : 

- 

  

  

YOU MUST BE PRESENT AND MAY BE REPRE- 

SENTED BY A LAWYER. IF YOU ARE FREE ON 

APPEARANCE BOND AND FAIL TO APPEAR, YOUR 

BOND WILL BE SUBJECT TO FORFEITURE AND A 

WARRANT MAY ISSUE FOR YOUR RE-ARREST. 
  

DEFENDANT IS REQUIRED TO: 

(1) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (572 -3107). 
YOUR BONDSMAN. AND THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 

OF ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS: 

(2) MAINTAIN CONTINUING COMMUNICATION WITH YOUR LAWYER, 

IF YOU HAVE ONE: 

(3) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (S72 - 3107) 

OF THE NAME OF YOUR LAWYER: 

(4) BE PRESENT WITH YOUR LAWYER AT THE TIME AND PLACE 

INDICATED ON THIS NOTICE: 

(5) BE AWARE THAT FAILURE TO APPEAR WITH YOUR LAWYER 
ON THE DATE SET MAY RESULT IN YOUR BEING FOUND IN 

CONTEMPT OF COURT: 

(6) NOTIFY THE COURT IMMEDIATELY IF IT SHOULD APPEAR THAT 
UPON TRIAL OR ARRAIGNMENT YOU MAY NOT BE REPRESENTED 

BY A LAWYER: 

(7) BRING THIS NOTICE TO COURT ON THE REQUIRED DATE. 

  

A COPY OF THIS NOTICE 1S PERMANENTLY RETAINED IN YOUR CASE FILE 

  

  

  

   



  

  
  

STATE OF GEORGIA 
FULTON COUNTY 
CALENDAR NOTICE 

YOU MUST BE PRESENT AND MAY BE REPRE- 

SENTED BY A LAWYER. IF YOU ARE FREE ON 

APPEARANCE BOND AND FAIL TO APPEAR, YOUR 

BOND WILL BE SUBJECT TO FORFEITURE AND A 

ARRANT MAY ISSUE FOR Y R -ARREST. 

STATEVS. LRI1GHTs BEN w S OUR RE-ARBES       
INDICTMENT NO. A9917& 141 

THIS CASE IS SET UPON A 
DEFENDANT IS REQUIRED TO: 

(1) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (572 -3107), 

  

RRA YOUR BONDSMAN. AND THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 

JLE A AND A IGNMENT OF ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS: 

LENDAR FOR AUGUST Ses 1988 2) MAINTAIN CONTINUING COMMUNICATION WITH YOUR R AT 30AM + FULTON COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 8 MANTA CONTIN UNCATION WITH YOUR LAWYER: 

BEFORE THE HONORABLE (3) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (572 - 3107) 

LUTHER ALVYERSO N OF THE NAME OF YOUR LAWYER: 

JUDGE, FULTON SUPERIOR COURT, CRIMINAL (4) BE PRESENT WITH YOUR LAWYER AT THE TIME AND PLACE 

DIVISION INDICATED ON THIS NOTICE: 

(5) BE AWARE THAT FAILURE TO APPEAR WITH YOUR LAWYER 

THiS 18 DAY OF JULYe 1988 ON THE DATE SET MAY RESULT IN YOUR BEING FOUND IN 
CONTEMPT OF COURT; 

BARBARA J. PRICE (6) NOTIFY THE COURT IMMEDIATELY IF IT SHOULD APPEAR THAT 
- CLERK OF SUPERIOR'COURT Coa UPON TRIAL OR ARRAIGNMENT YOU MAY NOT BE REPRESENTED 

(7) BRING THIS NOTICE TO COURT ON THE REQUIRED DATE. 

A Y
a
 

an
s 

ng, La
) 

he
 

|
 

ha
d 

ha
lt

 |
 

J
 

A
L
 

. 

B
a
 

a
 

BORSUKs LYNNE'Y 
PUBLIC DEFENDER 

  

      

L 
- 2 RT TL I WS a veh agi * 

A COPY OF THIS NOTICE iS PERMANENTLY RETAINED IN YOUR CASE FILE 

(as | 

SIME SEOnCA YOU MUST BE PRESENT AND MAY BE REPRE- 
SENTED BY A LAWYER. IF YOU ARE FREE ON 

CALENDAR NOTICE APPEARANCE BOND AND FAIL TO APPEAR, YOUR 
BOND WILL BE SUBJECT TO FORFEITURE AND A 
WARRANT MAY ISSUE FOR YOUR RE-ARREST. 

STATE VS. WRIGHT 9 BEN 

INDICTMENT NO. A9917% 140 

DEFENDANT IS REQUIRED TO: 

(1) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (572 -3107). 

  

THIS CASE IS SET UPON A 

PLE A AND ARRA IGNMENT YOUR BONDSMAN, AND THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 

CALENDAR FOR AUGUST Sy 1988 OF ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS: 

(2) MAINTAIN CONTINUING COMMUNICATION WITH YOUR LAWYER, 
AT 930AM ° FULTON COUNTY COURTHOUSE, IF YOU HAVE ONE: 

BEFORE THE HONORABLE (3) IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE CRIMINAL DIVISION (572 - 3107) 

LUTHER ALY ERS ON OF THE NAME OF YOUR LAWYER: 

JUDGE, FULTON SUPERIOR COURT, CRIMINAL (4) BE PRESENT WITH YOUR LAWYER AT THE TIME AND PLACE 

DIVISION INDICATED ON THIS NOTICE: 

THIS DAY OF (5) BE AWARE THAT FAILURE TO APPEAR WITH YOUR LAWYER 

18 JULYe 1988 ON THE DATE SET MAY RESULT IN YOUR BEING FOUND IN 
CONTEMPT OF COURT; 

BARBARA J. PRICE (6) NOTIFY THE COURT IMMEDIATELY IF IT SHOULD APPEAR THAT 

~ CLERK OF SUPERIOR COURT 1 UPON TRIAL OR ARRAIGNMENT YOU MAY NOT BE REPRESENTED 

ADDRESSEE: BY A LAWYER: 

(7) BRING THIS NOTICE TO COURT ON THE REQUIRED DATE. 

A99174-D-0 

WRIGHT y- BEN : 

259 RICHARDSON ST #210 

ATLANTAy GA 

e A COPY OF THIS NOTICE IS PERMANENTLY RETAINED IN YOUR CASE FILE 

  

 



  

a 

—— Ant SLITS AAA ATE CSN . Rr CT fo SOL Bes i ape   

  

  

  

  

  

  

    

    

  
  

  

  
  

  
  

FINAL DISPOSITION ) SC-6 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY FINAL DISPOSITION 

STATE OF GEORGIA CRIMINAL ACTION NO. - G5) F# 

VS. OFFENSE($) 
£ 7 gg L.A. 

rd 

July-August TERM, 19 88 

- X PLEA: O VERDICT: O OTHER DISPOSITION 
S NEGOTIATE O JURY O GUILTY ON O NOLLE PROSEQUI ORDER ON 
Y GUILTYONCOUNT(S) OO NON-JURY COUNT(S) COUNT(S) 
2 'D NOLO CONTENDERE ON O NOT GUILTY ON O DEAD DOCKET ORDER ON 

COUNT(S) COUNT(S) COUNT(S) 
O TO LESSER INCLUDED O GUILTY OF INCLUDED 

OFFENSE(S) OFFENSE(S) OF 
ON COUNT(S) (SEE SEPARATE ORDER) 

ON COUNT(S) 
  

DO DEFENDANT WAS ADVISED OF HIS/HER RIGHT TO HAVE THIS SENTENCE REVIEWED BY THE SUPERIOR COURTS SENTENCE REVIEW PANEL. 

FELONY SENTENCE O MISDEMEANOR SENTENCE 

WHEREAS, the above-named defendant has been fi iy i above- stated offense, WHEREUPON, it is ordered and adjudged by the Court that: The said defendant is hereby 

sentenced to confinement for a period of 

  

  

  

in the State Penal System or such other institution as the Commissioner of the State Department of Corrections or Court may direct. to be computed as provided by law. 
HOWEVER, it is further ordered by the Court 

K 1) THAT the above sentence may be served on probation 

0 2) THAT upon service of of the above e the r inder of may be served 
on probation PROVIDED that the said defendant complies with the following general and other conditions herein imposed by the Court as a part of this sentence. 

of 

  
  

  

  

  

    

  

O GENERAL CONDITIONS OF PROBATION 
endant. having been granted the privilege of serving all or part of the above-stated sentence on probation, hereby is sentenced to the following general conditions 
tion: 

1) Do not violate the criminal laws of any governmental unit. 

2) Avoid injurious and vicious habits - especially alcoholic intoxication and narcotics and other dangerous drugs unless prescribed lawfully. 
3) Avoid persons or places of disreputable or harmful character. 
4) Report to the Probation-Parole Supervisor as directed and permit such Supervisor to visit him (her) at home or elsewhere. 
5) Work faithfully at suitable employment insofar as may be possible. 

6) Do not change his (her) present place of abode. move outside the jurisdicton of the Court. or leave the State for any period of time without prior permission of the 
Probation Supervisor. 

7) Support his (her) legal dependants to the best of his (her) ability. 

8) Probationer shall. from time to time upon oral or written request by any Probati Officer, produce a breath, urine, and/or blood specimen for analysis for the 
possible presence of a substance prohibited or controlled by any law of the State of Georgia or of the United States. 

OTHER CONDITIONS OF PAROLE 

£5 IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant pay a fine in the amount of Lo) : plus $50 or 10%. whichever is less pursuant to O.C.G.A. 
15-21-70. and pay restitution in the amount of Probation Fee, Court Costs_ Attorney's Fees. 

9 
M 

N Payments are: 

w
y
 

Oo
o 

o
o
o
 

  

  

  
  

  

  

  

ws IT IS THE FURTHER ORDER of the Court. and the defendant is hereby advised that the Court may. at any time. revoke any conditions of this probation and/or discharge the 
2 defendant from probation. The probationer shall be subject to arrest fgr violation of any condition of probation herein granted. If such probation is revoked. the Court may order the 
© of the which was originally imposed or any portiof thereof in the mapper provided by law after deducting therefrom the amount of time the defendant has served on 

| probation. 

QM 7 Attorney at Law, Fulton County, by 

  

    
The defendant was represented by the Honorable 

(Employment) (Appointment) 
    
  

    
  

     

  

2 CourtReporer Mary McLelland ) 
2 - 

£ So ordered this__oth day of August 19 88 é \e a 
Luther Alverson Judge, Fulton Superior Court 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

£ This is to certify that a true and correct copy of this Sentence of Probation hag been delivered in person t defendant and he/she instructed regarding the conditions 
$B asset forth above. = : ~ 
i 

  

   

™ SS sy gaat va 
ae Probation Officer 

Copy resend and instructions regarding condigions acknowledge. 2) S) Va 
This ce dav of TIE 19 bi & :   

  White - Clerk Goldenrod - Defendant Pink - Probation Office BUUK i] G 0 PRE 4 97 ale 16 3 B ubuiooet 

? 

 



ASA YJ pag A <0 
Upon motion of Asst. Dist. Atty. 4 blriskd, a bm-65-ar-MCA-5/12/88 

  

  

  

  

  

bm-32 

the within Indictment Is ordered placed upon the dead 

docket and the surety Is relieved of liability In this 

case. This the 3S, a Ra 190d > 
& 

AY 1 Cds WITNESSES: Clerk's No. . . .. A- . a 7 1 LR JUDGE, S.C., A.J.C. 

i 
AUG 16 1988 BPS 

FULTON SUPERIOR COURT L. T. Burkett 
¥ R.C. Love 

R.E. Taylor E a. Dik 
THE STATE 

Vs. 
CRIME LAB: v 
George J. Fontis BEN. WRIGHT. -and- STANLEY - WRIGHT kien e 88-10900 VIOLATION GEORGIA CONTROLLED 

SUBSTANCES ‘ACT Dl BN AER Pr SR GR A ER ATR EE 

D
e
f
e
n
d
a
n
t
 

RO
OK
 1
1
6
0
 

PA
SE
 
4
5
9
 

JO 
/ Di

st
ri
ct
 
At

to
rn

ey
 

De
fe

nd
an

t'
s 

At
to

rn
ey

 

  fu
ll
 

pa
ne

l,
 

fo
rm
al
 

ar
ra

ig
nm

en
t 

an
d 

pl
ea

ds
. 

        wa
iv

es
 

co
py

 
of

 
in
di
ct
me
nt
s,
 

lis
t 

of
 
wi
tn
es
se
s,
 

  

  

19 

  

 



  

STATE OF GEGRGIA, COUNTY OF FULTON. 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAID COUNTY. 

  

THE GRAND JURORS selected, chosen and sworn for the County of Fulton, to-wit: 

Paul G. Scott, Foreman 
Sara Singley, Asst. Foreman N

=
 

* 

  ’ Goantdeiiih 
Patricia Moyle, Asst. Secretary 

Ruth G. Alessi 
Nancy B. Bradley 
Johnnie R. Brown 
Suddie L. Brown [

E
S
 

RN 
R
N
 

eo
 

o 
oo 

o
o
 

Ra. ke P™A 
10. T. Doyle Hackney 
11. Rosella Lee Harden 
12. William J. Knuckles 
13. Lynda Land 

in the name and behalf of the citizens of Georgia, charge and accuse 

Craig L. Lawson 
Frankie McDowell 
Patricia Nowlan 
Lawrence G. Obenchain 

Vance C. Powers 
Larry V. Queen 
Louise E. Rollins 

Selma Schultz 
Louise P. Shirley 
warren S. Whatley, Jr. 

Ira Curry, lst. Alt. 
Cheryl A. Magee, 2nd Alt. 

  
BEN WRIGHT and STANLEY WRIGHT 
  

with the offense of: — 

VIOLATION GEORGIA CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT 
  

for that said accused, in the County of Fulton and State of Georgia, on the 

27th day of 
  

April 19 88 
’ 

  

did unlawfully possess and have under their control less than one 

ounce of Marijuana; said possession being with intent to distribute 

said Marijuana; - 

contrary to the laws of said State, the good order, peace and dignity thereof. 
500 : “a 1) 

LEWIS R. SLATON, isi L160 AGE 435 
Special Presentment.  



  

ae 

PRINT, DO NOT WRITE 

  

  

  

Tid I, S00 = 

= 41 Bond § & 000 + SO per sor. Ande. 4 -30-84 

: Trist Dasa S=12-~ §§ Hour [630 

Pima S TIN LEY = Wa 6 HT 
(Furst) Be elle eet) 

259 RicHarPSon RD. S.\J/. 

Security NOAA THE SST LonONG CoO. 

Address 

  

  

  

  

  

  

    
  

CTY 

B cmon DUEZAT  avauers Tope of Song 

fomion no QO22A°H _ pmeumes 
Eas Return Cash To 

; Oo 22. = : Citation No “eo Amount § Err 

CitstionNe C022 40 & Amoums 
Dete of Final Disposition T [pes of Forteture 

      
  

  

  

  

  

  

Fine 8 —_— 

FILEDINO £ 
oo 

GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY JUN Pits 
UX] Know All Men by these Presents: gr iiitaion jd 

THAT WE STewmesy WR i6rT— SULTON COUNTY GEORGIA <= 
PRINCIPAL, and LOA TWEENS TT 

RBononw &¢ Ceo - SECURITIES. are held 
and firmly bound unto the City of Atlants (but only if 8 judge of the Municipel Court of Atisnts be the Court of inquiry) 
and unto His Excellencyd oe Franc Hann. Governor of The 
State of Georgia, and his successors in office, in the penal sum of. § Ge, OS © —onu for the 

  

true payment whereof we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, firmly 

by these presents. 
; ; 4-30-11 

Signed with our hands, sealed with our seals, and dated 

19. 

  

  

| 
2
a
a
0
r
 

‘0
% 

an
os

 

RS
 
a
 

VI
HV
 

HY
 

21
0 

9 4 
NaI

 
Hi
ll
 

Si 

THE CONDITIONS OF THE ABOVE OBLIGATION ARE SUCH, that if above bound STancey, \Waig ot ; 
(the “A d’’) shall personally be and appear before a 

  

Court of Inquiry (which may include a Judge of the Municipal Court of Atlanta) to be convened at SENET A CGC 
“Sc Pn 
  

name of court or judge) on S—-|2- 

— (time of scheduled appeerance) from day to day, and Term to Term, there to determine if the Accused 

shall be committed, and not depart therefrom without leave of that Court, then this bond insofar as the cbligee, 

the City of Atlanta, is concerned, shall be void, eise to remain in full torce and virtue; and if the Court of inquiry not 

be a Judge of the Municipe! Court of Atlanta and if the Accused not depart the Court-of Inquiry without leave of . 

  

that Court, or if the Accused be by any Court of inquiry committed for triet of an offense. against the pens! ews .- 

of the State of Georgia and if the Accused shall personaly be and appeas st the next.(Superior Count of Fulton: 

County), (Superior -Court of DeKalb County), (Criminsl Court of Fulton. County) (State Court of DeKalb County) 

(Clayton County Superior Court and Clayton County Stats Court) to be held on S=12-8% 4:30 f/x from day 
  

  
nan! WE ID i BH eT of_PoSS F/a Cow. Fe Ne 

M f Je 0%s DRUG QEUTETTS [oa MMT, Poss mT OW 7 MoT Blu 
AY 
  

with which he stands charged, and shall not depart thence without the leave of said Court, then the 5... obligation 
shall be null and void, else to remain in full force and virtue. 

in the event that the Court of Inquiry shall bind the Accused over for appearance before the Superior Court 

of Fulton County, Superior Court of DeKalb County, Criminal Court of Fulton County, State Court of DeKalb County, 

Superior Court of Clayton County, State Court of Clayton County, and in so doing shall reduce the bsil under which 

the Accused is bound over to sn amount less than the penal sum set forth above, then the Principal and Securities. 

named herein shall be obligated to the Governor of the State of Georgie only in the reduced amount. . 

And the better to secure the payment of this bond, in the event of forfeiture, we each, for ourselves and: 

families, and as the head of our respective families renounce and waive all right and benefit of the homestead 

snd exemption laws of the State, whether the same be guaranteed by constitutional or legisiative provisions 

providing for homestead and exemptions to the people of-Georgia. 

    

  

  

     

BOND APPROVED: 22103 - 202 

4 Sry = (eb 
4 Principal U U 

: pe GL 
Security CGA    

  

 



  

  

  

PRINT, DO NOT WRIIE - 
| 500 : 

, Bona s_DAR + SO ewbo. ude “ 4 

a’’} / Trial Dete. Hy Hour 2 © 

= Pr Zs weg Ad Cy 
VA [Crem] bf u 3 oy 

gE | 

agrons__2S9 Re~xhnedsu/ sr #72 Cn. ule 

Security LTT Carlee BD   

  

  

S
N
O
I
L
O
I
Y
Y
O
D
 

40
 
NY
IU
NG
 

VI
NY
LY
 

40
 
AL
D 

  

YI
LN
ID
 
NO
II
NI
L3
0 

TV
IY
1I
Yd
 

  

  

    
  

  

      
Judge 

FILED IN OFFICE 

88 
GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY JU v 

omens bt Jor 
Muay 

DEPUTY CLERK SUPERIOR COURT 
THAT we Teal Wecoht 

PRINCIPAL, and 

SECURITIES ase heid: 

and firmly bound unto the City of Atianta (but only if a j of the Municipal Court of Atlanta be the Court of inquiry) 

and unto His rans Governor of The 
State of Georgie, and his successors in office, in the pensl sum of § Zdd FS for the 

true payment whereof we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, firmly 

by these presents. / 

Signed with our hands, sealed with our seals, and dated %, 22/kR 
19. 

THE CONDITIONS OF THE ABOVE OBLIGATION ARE SUCH, that if above bound 

(the Accused’) shall pers 

Court of Inquiry (which may include 8 Judge of the Municipal Court of Atlanta) to be convened at ‘ 

name of court or judge) on = 28/2 RY 'Fpon 

(time of scheduled appearance) from day to day, and Term to Term, there to determine if the Accused 

shall be committed, and not depart therefrom without leave of that Court, then this bond insofar as the abligee, 

the City of Atlanta, is concerned, shall be void, else to remain in full torce and virtue; and if the Court of inquiry not 

be a Judge of the Municipal Court of Atlanta and if the Accused not depart the Court of Inquiry without leave of 

that Court, or if the Accused be by any Court of Inquiry committed for trial of an offense against the penal lewe 

of the State of Georgia and if the Accused shall personally be and appear at the next {Superior Coust of Fulton 

County), (Superior Court of DeKalb County), (Criminal Court of Fulton County) (S] of DeKalb County). 

(Clayton County Superior Court and Clayton County Stats-Court) to be held on Fo day 
e offense 

  

  

  

  

  

  

     
   

  

  

  
  

  

    
    

  

  

    
253 £ jar 

with which he stands charged, and’shall not depart thence without the leave of said Court, then the a ion <a AY Fe 

shall be null and void, eise to remain in full force and virtue. Ne 7a 

  in the event that the Court of Inquiry shall bind the A d over for app before the Superior Court 

of Fulton County, Superior Court of DeKalb County, Criminal Court of Fulton County, State Court of DeKalb County, 

Superior Court of Clayton County, State Court of Clayton County, and in so doing shall reduce the bail under which 

the Accused is bound over to an amount less than the penal sum set forth above, then the Principal and Securities 

named herein shall be obligated to the Governor of the State of Georgia only in the reduced amount. 

And the better to secure the payment of this bond, in the event of forfeiture, we each, for ourselves and 

families, and as the head of our respective families renounce and waive all right and benefit of the homestead 

and exemption laws of the State, whether the same be guaranteed by constitutional or lsgisistive provisions 

providing for homestead and exemptions to the people of Georgia. 

BOND APPROVED: 3600 2105 me 261 

Dkede Fo 2 FR 
  

Principal 

  

  

 



. STATE OF GEORGIA 

COUNTY OF FULTON 

1 Valerie Wright Deputy Clerk of 

the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia, do hereby certify 

that the within and foregoing is a true and correct copy of 

. Proceedings (Filed Sept. 13, 1989 
. Notice Of Apprearnace 
. Motion to Suppress 

. Motion For Discovery : 

. Demand For Copies .(Filed July 20, 1988) 
Motion to Suppress (Filed Juyl 20, 1988) 
Defendant's Motion To Suppress ° 
Final Disposition 
Calendar Notice 

Criminal Bond 

Indictment 

  
H
O
 
W
V
W
O
E
O
N
O
U
 

N
W
N
 

—
 

. 
S
E
A
R
S
 
U
R
E
 
R
l
 

R
R
 

a
t
s
 

—
 

- all of which appears of file and record in this Office. 

  

Given under my hand and seal of Office. 

This the 26th day of April{ 1991 

wea (J iL 
“DEPUTY CLERK, SUPERIOR COURT 
FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA 

   



Ad WE 8 Ar Ly ; Jes 90 W J SEE TN AE 

koi F.ored 

Supreme Court of Af lorida 

  

  

No. 73,261 

  

FRANK A. WALLS, 

Appellant, 

VE. 

STATE OF FLORIDA, 

Appellee. 

[April 11, 1991] 

KOGAN, J. 

Frank A, Walls appeals from a judgment and sentence of 

death. We have jurisdiction. Art. Vv, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. 

During the early morning hours of July 22, 1987, a 

neighbor heard loud noises coming from the mobile home of the 

victims, Edward Alger and Ann Peterson. When Alger failed to 

 



  

| BS RIN NT Shodie dr vie Sid Bol dees 

report for duty at the air force base his superior officer 

Sergeant Calloway went to Alger's home. The body of a nude 

female was discovered in the front bedroom. ' Calloway left 

immediately to telephone police. 

When investigators arrived, they found Peterson lying face 

down on the floor of the front bedroom. She had been shot twice 

in the head. Alger's nude body was found on the floor of the 

second bedroom. His feet were tied with a curtain cord and a 

piece of the same cord was tied to his left wrist. Alger had 

been shot three times and his throat was cut. 

A warrant was obtained to search the mobile home where 

Walls lived with his roommate. The warrant was issued based 

primarily on information given to the investigators by Walls' 

former roommate, who lived in the mobile home adjacent to that of 

the victims. A number of items were seized during the search 

that were linked to the crime scene. 

Following his arrest, Walls gave a statement to the 

investigators detailing his involvement in the murders. Walls 

was charged with ten offenses. Some of these charges were 

dismissed or reduced to lesser offenses following Walls' motion 

for judgment of acquittal at the conclusion of the trial. 

During pretrial detention, a correctional EALi0AF named 

Vickie Beck was asked to conduct e surveillance of Walls, because 

he was suspected in other murders. Beck approached Walls and 

assured him that anything he Lod her would remain confidential. 

She insisted that Walls not tell his attorney. As a result of  



  

HER LL “91 di ly YLRD 99d Bl BSE ] P.4.24 

her observations, Beck took detailed notes of Walls' statements 

and behavior, Later, these notes were given to the state and its 

examining psychiatrists, 

Walle pleaded not guilty and filed several pretrial 

motions, including a motion to determine his competency to stand 

trial. Five experts testified, three stating Walls was 

incompetent and two finding he Vas competent. The Latter two 

‘were the only ones who had relied on Beck's notes in evaluating 

Walls, The trial judge agreed with these two experts and held 

that Walls was competent to stand trial. 

The jury found Walls guilty of all charges submitted. On 

the murder vounts Walls was found guilty of felony murder for the 

death of Alger and guilty of premeditated and felony murder for 

the death of Peterson. After hearing the evidence in mitigation 

the jury recommended a life sentence for the death of Alger and a 

sentence of death for the murder of Peterson. The trial court 

complied with the jury's recommendations. 

In this appeal, Walls raises several issues, one of which 

ig dispositive of ths case. Walls argues that Beck's activities 

during his pretrial detention violated his constitutional rights. 

We agree that it violated the due process provision of the 

Florida Constitution, article I, section 9, 

As a matter of Florida law, we believe the legal rigors 

imposed by due process come into play when a psychiatric 

evaluation that may be used in any manner against the accused is 

conducted in whole or in part by means of an illegal subterfuge. 

 



  

"3 do Livy ‘od Ta oY, 5 SL Le J YT [43 ery 1 SEE 

: : = : p FH. Se 2d 

Art. I, § 9, Fla. Const. This includes instances when a third- 

party employing such a gubtertige elfectively is serving as 

information gatherer for medical oF psychological professionals 

who later will make such evaluations. Id. 

This is a conclusion required by precedent. The term "due 

process" embodies a fundamental conception of fa ivhess that 

derives ultimately from the natural rights of all individuals. 

Scull v. Stata, 569 So.2d 1251 (Fla. 1990). "Fairnesa" is nearly 

the equivalent of the concept of "good faith," which imposes a 

standard of conduct requiring both fairness and honesty. 

Munidinal mond & Mort : Aishopnts. Har) Drai 

Digt., 154 Fla. 246, 17 So.2d 226 (1944). As we stated in 

Haliburton v. State, 514 So.2d 1088 (Fla. 1987), "'due process 

requires fairness, integrity, and honor in the operation of the 

criminal justice system, and in its treatment of tha citizen's 

cardinal constitutional protections.'" Id, at 1090 (quoting 

Moran vv. Burhine, 475 U.8, 412, 467, 106 S.Ct. 1135, 1165 (1986) 

(Stevens, J., dissenting)). 

By any stretch of the imagination, the subterfuge used 

against Walls in this instance fails either to be fair or honest. 

Thus, since the subterfuge led to information later used against 

Walls, due process is implicated and the courts are required to 

conduct an intensive scrutiny of the police conduct in question. 

In a similar context, the United States Supreme Court has 

noted that 

 



  

HEE Ld di ake lio vikEL Sd Bol sen P.5/24 
L]  — 

certain interrogation techniques, either in 
isolation or as applied to the unique 
characteristics of a particular suspect, are so 
offensive to a civilized system of justice that 
they must be condemned under the Due Process 
Clause . . . 

Miller v. Fenton, 474 U.S. 104, 109 (1985). The Court then noted 

that "ours is an ac¢cusatorial and not an inquisitorial system." 

Id. at 110 (quoting Rogers v. Richmond, 365 U.S. 534, 541 

(1961)). It concluded that the admissibility of confessions 

obtained by ruse does not rest merely on whether those 

i Rather, due process requires an confessions were voluntary. 

examination of the particular methods used to extract the 

confession, even if that confession was voluntary in‘the 

strictest sense of the term. 

In the recent case of Illinois v., Perkins, 110 S.Ct. 2394 

(1990), Justice Brennan Res elaborated on the standards discussed 

above. The Perkins Court confronted a situation in which an 

undercover officer posed as an inmate and thereby extracted a 

confession from another inmate. The majority held that Miranda 

v.. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), was no bar to the admissibility 

of the confession because it had not been coerced. Perkins, 110 

S.Ct. at 2399, However, Justice Brennan noted that, on remand, 

the court below still would be required to consider whether the 

  

> Voluntariness, of course, involves consideration of the 

standards announced in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). 

 



  

Hk 11 dl Lui 1d WRC 994 Bi3l BSEes 

Miller case barred the confession on due process grounds. Id. at 

2400-01. Justice Brennan stated: 

The deliberate use of deception and 
manipulation by the police appears to be 
incompatible "with a system that presumes 
innocence and assures that a conviction will not 
be secured by inquisitorial means. . . ." 

Id. at 2400 (quoting Miller, 474 U.S. at 116)). 

We find that the due process provision of the Florida 

Constitution embodies the principles of fundamental fairness 

alaborated by Justice Brennan in Perkins. Art. i... 89, Fla. 

Const. Due process contemplates that the police and other state 

agents act in an accusatorial, not an inquisitorial, manner. 

Gross deception Shen as a means of evading constitutional rights 

has no place in such a system. 

Yet gross deception is precisely what led to the 

statements made by Walls while in custody. Here we find the 

surreptitious, admittedly illegal gathering of information later 

transmitted to those conducting psychiatric evaluations of rhs 

accused. In this case, a state agent befriended Walls, 

fraudulently encouraged him to speak freely "in confidence" to 

her, failed to warn him that the information she obtained later 

would be used against him in court, and discouraged him from 

telling his attorney of her activities. Later, these illegally 

obtained statements formed a substantial part of the basis for 

expert statements on which the trial court directly relied in 

finding Walls competent to stand trial. 

 



  

The state conceded at trial that this trickery violated 

Magsiah v. United Stateg, 377 U.S. 201 (1964), and Malone v. 

State, 390 So.2d 338 (Fla. 1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 1034 

(1981); and in this assessment, we must wholeheartedly agree.’ 

Here, as in Malone, we are confronted with a state-sponsored 

subterfuge designed in part to trap Walls and circumvent the 

clear requirements of the Constitution. See id. at 340. Thus, 

the trial court properly concluded and the state conceded that 

none of the information obtained by Beck could be used against 

walls in the state's case at trial or in the penalty phase. 

Ag a matter of Florida law, however, we believe the trial 

court erred in not excluding Beck's information from al) aspects 

of trial. We do not agree with the state's argument that it now 

may have the advantage of Beck's subterfuge on matters relating 

to Walls' competence to stand trial. The clear requirements of 
To 

  

2 at trial, the state made the following comments: 

The State is prepared to stipulate that the 
statements given to Miss Beck by Walls were 
custodial, they were given without the advice by 
Mrs. [sic] Beck to Mr. Walls of his Miranda 
rights, and that they were not admissible for 
purposes of proving guilt, they are not 
admissible in any regard in the State's case in 
chief. 

Then the State's position is, consistent 
with the case law that I think we have here, 
that it is admissible as are [sic] other 
matters; for example, for use of impeachment 
should the defendant take the stand, and for use 
in making a determination as to mental state, 
such as competency hearing [sic]. 

J ar | 

 



  

Heme dd “od See wll Heel bil Flo F.9-24 ‘ wr 

article I, section 9 of the Florida Constitution have been 

violated, as well as this Court's prior holding in Malone. 

When the state employs an illegal subterfuge, the Florida 

Constitution forbids it from using the fruits of that subterfuge 

for any purpose that will work to the detriment of the defense's 

case, including determination of competence or insanity. Any 

other conclusion would encourage the use of such subterfuges and 

run against every basic conception of fairness erbodied within 

article I, section 9 of our Constitution. The procedure employed 

by the police in this instance flouted these standards and 

directly resulted in a court ruling on the competency issue that 

is now tainted by the illegal subterfuge. The court order and 

all that followed it thus cannot be allowed to stand under the 

Florida Constitution, Art. I, 8 9, Pla. Const. ss 

We also believe that the police conduct in this instance 

constituted an illegal interference with the attorney-client 

relationship in violation of our opinion in Haliburton, which 

itself rested entirely on article I, section 9 of the Florida 

Constitution. Haliburton, 514 So.2d at 1090. Although 

| Haliburton dealt with the state's deliberate failure to tell the 

accused of his attorney's communications, the issues presented by 

this case are sufficiently similar to warrant a similar result. 

Here, a state agent fraudulently interfered with the attorney- 

client relationship through deception aimed at preventing the 

accused from revealing information that would have alerted his 

attorney to the state's fraudulent activities. We believe the 

 



  

AFR 11 791 10:20 YLRC 904 651 USE6 F. 10.24 

  

following statement from Haliburton thus is equally applicable to 

the present case: 

"[P]Jolice interference in the attorney-client 
relationship is the type of governmental 
misconduct on a matter of central importance to 
the administration of justice that the Due 
Process Clause prohibits." : 

Haliburton, 514 So.2d at 1090 (quoting Buxbine, 475 U.S. at 467, 

106 S.Ct. at 1165 (Stevens, 1. dissenting)). Thus, the state's 

actions here constituted an unconstitutional interference with 

the attorney-client relationship, in violation of article I, 

section 9 of the Florida Constitution. Id, (relying on art. I, 8 

9, Fla. Const.). 

We hasten to distinguish this case from other cases in 

which police surveillance does not involve a ruse or subterfuge. 

The state and its agents tlearly are entitled to watch a person 

in custody and make notes of that person's voluntary or 

spontaneous behavior or comments. Psychiatric evaluations 

conducted in good faith and with proper authorization also 

clearly are an acceptable means for the state to employ, 

especially when competency or sanity may be in issue. Nothing 

prohibits the state from good-faith efforts to determine whether 

the defense's allegation of incompetency or insanity is genuine 

or spurious. 

For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the judgment of the 

court below and remand for new trial on all issues. On remand, 

any further psychiatric or psychological evaluations conducted on 

walls shall not rely to any degree, directly or indirectly, on 

 



  

ER IR H.llocd 

the information obtained by Beck. Thus, to eliminate the taint, 

any such evaluations shall not be conducted by the experts who 

previously received the information taken as a result of the 

police subterfuge. 

It is so ordered. 

SHAW, Cody and BARKETT, Jay QOQncur., 

GRIMES, J., concurs in result only. 
McDONALD, J., dissents with an opinion, in which OVERTON, J., 
concurs. 

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF 
FILED, DETERMINED. 

  

3 All other issues raised by the parties are rendered moot by 
this opinion and will not be addressed. 

wl(= rE 

 



  

Fa.losad 

GRIMES, J., concurring in result only. 

Because of the clear violation of Magsiah v. United 

States, 377 U.S. 201 (1964), I agree that the mental health 

experts should not have been permitted to testify after having 

been given the correctional officer's notes concerning Walls’ 

statements and behavior. 

 



HFR LL 91 18:21 VLRC 994 681 8566 P. 13754 

  

McDONALD, J., dissenting. 

Because the information obtained by the State was utilized 

solely for the purpose of evaluating the defendant's competency, 

I cannot join in the conclusion that there was a reversible due 

process violation, Had the State's action led to a confession on 

the facts of the case or led to the introduction of substantive 

evidence, I likely would join in the reversal. I do not believe, 

however, that the Tnappropriats gathering of facts surrounding 

one's competency equates to a due process violation. 

OVERTON, J., concurs. 

 



HEE LL “ol lui] YLRC 94d B21 BSbh P.14/24 

  

An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Okaloosa County, 

Robert G. Barron, Judge ~ Case No. 87-856 A 

Nancy Daniels, Public Defender and W. C. McLain, Assistant Public 
Defender, Second Judicial Circuit, Tallahassee, Florida, 

for Appellant 

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General and Mark C. 'Menser, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, 

for Appellee 

~13- a 

 



  

Press Summaries 
Oral Argument Cases 
April 8-~12,-1381 

NOTE: The following summaries are drawn from the briefs of 
counsel and the lower court judgments filed in the various cases. 
They are intended to provide a general idea of the facts and 
issues presented. These summaries should not be considered 
official court documents. More specific information about the 
facts and legal issues can be obtained by examining the briefs 
and records filed with the Court, NL 

MONDAY, APRIL 8, 1991 

Style: State of Fla. v. Mario Albo Lara, No. 73,888 

Facts: Lara was convicted of first-degree murder and other 
crimes and was sentenced to death. On appeal, the convictions 
and sentence were affirmed. On motion for post-conviction 
relief, the trial court granted relief as to the death sentence 
but denied it as to the convictions. Both parties appeal. 

Issues: (1) Whether the court erred in granting postconviction 
relief from the death sentence, 

(2) Whether the court erred in denying postconviction 
relief as to the convictions. 

A nS oon 

Style: Michael Tyrone Crump v. State of Fla., No. 74,230 

Facts: Crump was convicted of first-degree murder and was 
sentenced to death. On appeal, he argues that improper evidence 
of a separate crime was admitted, that there were various 
procedural errors at the trial, and that the death sentence is 
invalid. 

Issues: (1) Whether the conviction should be affirmed. 

(2) Whether the death sentence should be affirmed. 

 



  

HEF LL “31 ldied WLELC Dud pEl Bobo P.16-24 

Style: Clarence James Jones v. State of Fla., No. 74,866 

Facts: Jones was convicted of first-degree murder for shooting a 
policeman and was sentenced to death. On appeal, he argues that 
evidence was improperly admitted and other relevant evidence 
excluded; that the court erred in rulings on jury selection; that 
the sentencing findings were erroneous; and that the sentence of 
death is improper. 

Issues: (1) Whether the conviction should be affirmed. 

(2) Whether the death sentence should be affirmed. 

 



MEL poe 35 RESO] 07 U0 LS I 1 Le CL SE see BL Noe A Mm A F 17 2 pa 
LJ RS 

  

TUESDAY, APRIL 3, 1991 

Style: Alvarez v. Trustees of Tampa City Pension Fund, No. 76,418 

Facts: Linda Alvarez sought and the trial court ordered child- 
support deductions from the pension benefits of her former 
hushand. The pension fund appealed and the district court 
reversed, holding that the special law establishing the pension 

fund provided that the benefits payable thereunder were not to be 
subject to any legal process. The district court found that this 

provision prevailed over laws providing for child-support 
enforcement through garnishment. Alvarez seeks review. 

Issue: Whether statutes authorizing income deduction orders for 
child support should prevail over provisions prohibiting legal 
process against certain pension benefits. 

Style: The Florida Bar v. Alfred §. Wells, No. 74,320 

Facts: The Florida Bar brought this action against attorney 
Wells alleging professional misconduct. A referee recommended 
finding respondent guilty of several counts of misconduct and 
recommended that he be suspended for eighteen months. The 
Florida Bar seeks review, arguing that Wells should be disbarred. 

Issue: Whether the recommended discipline is appropriate. 

SA i inde nis i, ls ott 

Style: William Christopher v. State of Florida, No. 74,451 

Facts: Christopher was convicted of first-degree murder and was 
sentenced to death. On appeal, Christopher raises challenges to 
the trial court's evidentiary and procedural rulings, the 
sentencing findings and the sentence of death. 

Issues: (1) Whether the conviction should be affirmed. 

(2) Whether the sentence of death should be affirmed. 

 



  

HEE Ld or J 10 7 SRT I so Hm fe SR LR BR i F.l18-2¢ » on TA il 

Style: The Florida Bar, In re Petition of Frankel, No. 76,853 

Facts: Florida Bar member Frankel has filed a challenge to the 
Florida Bar's use of funds derived from compulsory member dues 
for purposes of lobbying the legislature on certain public policy 
issues. 

Issue: Whether the Court should enjoin the Bar's activities or 
grant other relief. 

 



    

i od Rk BE Pe SI LE Role ST NT Oe TRE ia NR NE F 19-2 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 10, 1991 

Style: Johnson v. Dugger, No. 73,362; Johnson v. State, No. 
74,743. 

Facts: Johnson was convicted of first-degree murder and was 
sentenced to death. On appeal, the conviction and sentence were 
affirmed. Johnson now seeks a writ of habeas corpus and appeals 
the deniel of postconviction relief under rule 3.850. He claims 
there was inadequate inquiry into his competency to stand trial 
and the voluntariness of his waiver of Miranda rights; that he 
was denied effective assistance of counsel and other rights at 
trial and in sentencing; and that the sentencing instructions and 
findings were improper. 

Issue: Whether there is any ground for collateral relief from 
the conviction or sentence. 

Style: James F. Coy, M.P. v. Fla. Birth«Related Neurological 
Injury Compensation Plan, No. 76,565. 

Facts: The Compensation Plan assesses $5000 annually upon 
obstetricians who choose to participate, and $250 on all other 
physicians licensed in Florida. A group of physicians filed an 
action challenging the $250 assessment as unreasonable in that 
physicians generally get no more benefit from the plan than the 
general public. The trial court upheld the Plan and the district 
court of appeal affirmed. Petitioners argue the assessment 
deprives them of due process and equal protection and that 
lawmaking authority is delegated to the Plan and the Department 
of Insurance. 

Issues: Whether the Plan is invalid on any of the grounds 
raised. 

 



  

grt tan FH. cll gd 

Style: Albert Hlad v. State of Florida. No. 76,623. 

Facts: Hlad was convicted of DUI and was given an increased 
penalty on the ground that it was his fourth DUI conviction. He 
challenged the "enhancement" on the ground that one of the prior 
offenses relied upon was obtained in violation of his right to 
counsel. The trial court rejected the argument and the district 
court of appeal affirmed on the ground that the uncounseled DUI 
was not an invalid conviction since the charge was a misdemeanor 
and no jail time was given. 

Issue: Whether a prior DUI conviction, obtained in a proceeding 
in which the defendant was not represented by counsel, can be 
considered for enhancement purposes in adjudicating or sentencing 
for a later offense. 

Style: Gregory Capehart v. State of Florida, No. 74,231. 

Facts: Capehart was convicted of first-degree murder and was 
sentenced to death. On appeal he argues that the evidence was 
insufficient, there were numerous errors in procedural and 
evidentiary rulings at trial, the sentencing findings were 
erronoeous, and other matters. 

Issues: (1) Whether the conviction should be affirmed. 

(2) Whether the sentence of death should be affirmed. 

 



  

Pais Ld Ree SU 50 SATA SE NR of Ie 1 D2 EE ei 0 Ye TT Ca il Ah F.21/24 

THURSDAY, APRIL 11, 1931 

Style: Milford Wade Byrd v. State of Florida, No. 74,691 

Facts: Byrd was convicted of first-degree murder and was 
sentenced to death. On appeal, the conviction and sentence were 
affirmed. Byrd now appeals from the denial of his motion for 
postconviction relief under criminal procedure rule 3.850. He 
claims that he did not get a fair trial and that he was not 
afforded the effective assistance of counsel. 

Issues: Whether a valid claim for postconviction relief is 
presented. 

So ————— ~~ — 

Style: State of Florida v. Michael Donaldson, No. 76,129. 

Facts: Donaldson was convicted of DUI. On review, the district 
court of appeal held that it was error to admit a breathalyzer 
test into evidence without testimony as to the maintenance, 
inspection, operation and performance of the machine. The DCA 
reasoned that these matters are statutory prerequisites to the 
admission of such tests into evidence. The state seeks review. 

Issue: Whether the evidence was properly admitted, 

Style: Randy Williams v. State of Florida, No. 76,609. 

Facts: Convicted of a crime, Williams was put on probation. 
Upon his violation of probation, the court imposed a guidelines- 
departure sentence. The district court of appeal approved the 
departure on the ground that there was an escalating pattern of 
criminal conduct. Williams seeks review, arguing that on a 
violation of probation, the court is limited to a one-~cell 
increase in the guidelines-recommended sentence, The state 
responds that on violation of probation, the court can impose any 
sentence it could have imposed initially, including a departure 
sentence supported by proper reasons. 

Issue: Whether the trial court was properly permitted to impose 
a departure sentence upon revoking the defendant's probation. 

-—] 

 



  

SEE RE Ne a Ue RE Sl RE a TY Se 
P.22724 

Style: Jacksonville Medical Center v., State of Florida, 
No, 76,2713 

Facts: The Akers, plaintiffs in a medical malpractice suit, 
sought discovery of a physician's application for appointment to 
Jacksonville Medical Center's medical staff. The hospital 
objected on the.ground of statutory privilege. The trial court 
ordered production of the documents. The district court of 
appeal affirmed, reasoning that the statutory privilege applied 
to the hospital's internal documents but not to documents 
submitted to it. 

: : a 
Issue: Whether the documents in question are subject to 
discovery. 

I —_—r var oo rod 

Style: In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Judicial 
Administration, No. 76,962. 

Facts: The Florida Bar Committee on Rules of Judicial 
Administration has proposed rules for the certification and 
regulation of court reporters. 

Issue: Whether the proposed rules should be adopted. 

 



  
FRIDAY, APRIL 12, 1391 

Style: In re Amendments to the Florida Probate Rules 

Facts: The Florida Bar's Committee on Probate Rules has proposed 
amendments to the rules affecting guardianship. 

Issue: Whether the proposed rules should be adopted, 

oy 

pv —— TW S——— 

Style: P.A.Q. vs, A.F,, NO. 76,527 

Facts: A.F. was paying P.A.G. for the support of a minor child 
pursuant to a previous judgment of paternity. P.A.G. petitioned 
for modification of A.F.'s support obligation. The modification 
proceeding was settled by agreement. P.A.G. then asked the court 
to award attorney's fees, which it did. On appeal, the district 
court reversed on the ground that the paternity statute does not 
authorize attorneys fees in actions for modification of support. 

Issue: Whether the paternity statute can be construed to provide 
for recovery of attorneys fees in modification proceedings. 

 



  

Hi-i 1) SL dks VFL 9d BEL HSER te Fd bibl bob F.24-24 

Style: Carl Puffinberger v. State of Plorida, No. 75,317 

Facts: In sentencing Puffinberger, the trial court departed the 
guidelines on the basis of three unscoreable adjudications on the 
defendant's record that were committed when he was a juvenile. 
The district court of appeal affirmed, but asked the Supreme 
Court whether it was correct to do so. 

Issue: To what extent may non-scoreable juvenile offenses 
support a departure sentence? 

So. wn wn w— WP . — — 

Style: In re Appellate Court Response to Anders Briefs, 
No. 76,483 : 

Facts: In three criminal appeals, appointed counsel filed Anders 
briefs stating that no issue of reversible error appeared, but 
also identifying issues that could be raised in the appeals. The 
state moved to preclude use of the Anders procedure. The 
district court of appeal held that the procedure was appropriate 
in these cases. The state seeks review. 

Issue: To what extent may counsel submit that no issue of 
reversible error appears while at the same time identifying 
issues to be considered on the appeal? 

—l0= 

   











  TOTAL FP.BE 

 



ROBERT H. STROUP 
ATTORNEY AT LAW 

STROUP & COLEMAN 
191 WALTON STREET, N.W. TELEPHONE 

ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 (404) 522-8500  



  

    
To 

Z
X
R
E
X
 

EY
 
ve

 

  

  

  

Parole Board Basics 
STATE BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES 

  

Floyd Veterans Memorial Building; Fifth Floor, East Tower; 2 M.L. King, Jr., Drive, S.E.; Atlanta, Georgia 30334 
Telephone: (404) 656-5651 
  

Fundamentals 
The State Board of Pardons and Paroles is com- 

posed of five members appointed by the Governor for 
staggered seven-year terms subject to confirmation by 
the State Senate, Each year the Board elects one of its 
members to serve as chairman, 

The Board was created in February 1943 by statute 
law, and in August 1943 Georgia voters ratified an 
amendment setting forth the Board's authority in the 
State Constitution. 

The Board is part of the Executive Branch of State 
government, It is attached, for the purpose of receiving 
administrative support, to the Department of Correc- 
tions but performs its duties independently of that 
Department, 

The Role of a Parole Board 
Executive clemency has a long tradition. Its 

history goes back through the Governor, the Colonial 

Governor, the King, the tribal chieftain, The final 
appeal for mercy is heard by the top executive or, 
currently, the executive clemency agency. 

Clemency is typically administered today by an 
independent parole board, which performs a function 
vital if criminal justice is to remain a flexible and con- 
tinuing process throughout, The board's existence 
ensures that the Executive Branch, in addition to the 
Legislative and Judicial, has a discretionary role in 
criminal justice. Thus it provides a vital part of the 
checks and balances of Constitutional government, 

The principle of separation of powers is upheld 
when the judiciary's regular involvement in a case ends 
at the time the offender is sentenced to prison. Then the 
parole board begins monitoring the inmate and draw- 
ing knowledge of the case from the court, police, prison, 
and society to form the basis of a just decision to grant 
or deny clemency. 

Persons are sentenced to prison for four purposes: 
punishment, incapacitation, deterrence, and rehabilita- 
tion. A parole board studies the need tor and accom- 
plishment of cach of these purposes in cach case being 
considered. Justice demands that the handling of each 
case should be tailored to the crime and to the offender. 
A parole board's view of a case necessarily differs 
from that of a local court or law enforcement agency; 
the board can compare the case with thousands of 
others statewide. The board's unique central position 
and authority allow it to reduce sentencing disparity. 
Excessive harshness is more readily reduced, but exces- 
sive leniency in the form of a too-light confinement 
sentence may be corrected partially by parole denial, 

It would be difficult to overestimate the importance 
of a parole board's investigative and decision-making 
authority being centralized. Any substitute prisoner- 
release mechanism triggered by numerous officials scat- 
tered in courthouses or prisons would be destined to be 
inequitable and not in the best interests of the citizens’ 
safety or taxpayers’ pocketbooks, 

Parole supervision works. This is the message from 
studies conducted during a |S-year period by the 
National Council on Crime and Delinquency. Parole 
revocation rates nationwide have consistently been well 
below the recidivism rates for persons discharged from 
prison without parole. In Georgia the parolee success 
rate regularly exceeds the national average. 

Discretion in releasing inmates appears inevitable, 
The question is where discretion is best placed and how 
it is best applied. The answer is provided in an inde- 
pendent, informed. just, and careful parole board. 

Rule-Making Authority 
The Board may at any time adopt rules not incon- 

sistent with the law. 

Tuesdays Reserved for Visitors 
Anyone wishing to speak with a Board representa- 

live about a case may come to the Board's central office 
on any Tuesday which is not a State holiday between 

  

  

. TIME-SERVED RULES 
FOR PAROLE CONSIDERATION 

A person serving a non-life sentence is consid- 
ered for future parole and notified of the deci- 
sion as soon as necessary investigations are 

completed — usually about four months after 
entering the State prison system. Typically, this 
is his only consideration. 

% 
A person serving a life sentence generally is 
considered after serving seven years and, if 
denied, is reconsidered at intervals, 

Overriding the above rules where applicable, the 
State Constitution does not permit exceptions 
to the following laws: 

I. A person serving for Armed Robbery com- 
mitted in 1977 or later must serve at least five 
years before becoming eligible for parole 
consideration, 

2. A person whose death sentence is commuted 
to life imprisonment by the Board in 1977 or 
later must serve 25 years before becoming 
cligible for parole consideration, 

3. A person convicted of Murder and sen- 
tenced to life imprisonment for an offense 
committed on or after July |, 1983, and who 
has previously been imprisoned under a life 
sentence must serve 25 years before become 
ing cligible for parole consideration. 

4. A person who is serving consecutive life 

sentences for offenses occurring in the same 
series of acts committed on or after July |, 
1983, and any of the life sentences is for 
Murder must serve consecutive ten-year 
periods for cach such sentence, up to a max- 
imum of 30 years, before becoming eligible 

for parole consideration.       

  

8:15a.m,and 4:15 p.m. No appointment is needed. The 
Board welcomes inmates’ relatives, friends, and attor- 
neys and others desiring to speak for or against 
clemency. 

Representation by Attorneys 
Representation by an attorney is not necessary for 

any type of clemency consideration, Consideration for 

parole is automatic, and application for other types of 
clemency is casy. Board procedures are not toa formal 

or complex for the average person to understand, The 
decision whether to employ an attorney is a personal 
decision by the offender, ex-offender, or anyone acting 
in his behalf, 

Only licensed attorneys who are active members, in 
good standing, of the State Bar of Georgia may appear 
before the Board for a fee. The Board may require an 
attorney representing a person before the Board to file a 
sworn statement as to whether he is receiving.a fee. 

A member of the Georgia General Assembly or 
other elected or appointed State official may not charge 
a fcc for appearing before the Board regardless of 
whether he is an attorney. 

Written Communication Preferred 
The Board greatly prefers receiving written com- 

munication on a case rather than oral communication 
so that such communication may readily be made a 
permanent part of the case file. 

Confidentiality of Records 
All information, both oral and written, reccived by 

the Board in the performance of its duty and which is 

not public record elsewhere and was not obtained in a 
public Board hearing is classified as confidential State 
secret unless declassified by resolution of the Board. 
Confidential information includes investigative and 
supervisory reports and recommendations for and 
against clemency. 

Majority Vote Decides Clemency 
A decision to grant any type of clemency is by 

majority vote. 

Acceptance of Conditions in Writing 
An inmate is informed of the conditions of his 

parole, reprieve, or other conditional clemency and 
must accept all conditions by signing the clemency 
document before the clemency will become effective, 

Withdrawal of Grant of Clemency 
The Board reserves the right to withdraw the grant 

of any form of clemency prior to the effective date if, in 
its discretion, it believes withdrawal to be justified. 

Earned Time 
The State Board of Pardons and Paroles does not 

administer the system of crediting Farned Time to an 
inmate's sentence. ‘The Department of Corrections has 

that responsibility, However, the program is phasing 
out so that an inmate serving for an offense committed 
in 1984 or thereafter receives no Earned Time credit 
whatsoever, 

A parolee with Earned Time eredit who is guilty of 
misconduct on parole may have Earned Time forfeited 

by order of the Parole Board. 

Parole 
Parole is the discretionary release of an offender 

from confinement, after he has served part of his sen- 
tence, under continuing State custody and supervision 
and under conditions which, il violated, permit his 
reimprisonment, In Georgia, State and county inmates 
may be granted parole only by the State Board of 
Pardons and Paroles. 

Parole Consideration 
An inmate serving a State felony or State misde- 

meanor sentence in the custody of the Departinent of 
Corrections is automatically considered for parole. No 
application is necessary, 

An inmate serving consecutive county misdemenn- 
or confinement sentences exceeding 12 months is con- 
sidered for parole if he has requested consideration, 

The Board considers an inmate lor parole 

regardless of appeals or other legal action by the 
inmate or his representive. If the Board has no active 
serial-numbered case file on him, he must request 
parole consideration, 

A request for parole consideration may be in any 
written form and must contain the name under which 

the inmate was convicted, the place where he is serving, 
the offense(s), date(s) and court(s) of conviction, and 

the length(s) of sentence(s). The request should be sub- 

mitted as early as possible to allow enough time for 
., necessary investigations. 

The Board may decide not to consider paroling an 
offender serving a Georgia sentence in custody at an 
out-of-State or Federal prison or at a mental hospital 
when favorable action of the Board would not result in 
the offenders release from confinement, 

Parole Decision by Independent Judgement 
When an inmate is considered for parole, the case 

file is given to one of the five Board members, who 
studies it, deliberates alone, and renders his indepen- 
dent decision. Then a staff member transfers the file to a 
second Board member, who writes his decision. This 
process continues until the majority decision has been 
determined. 

       P
a
 

sD
 L
A
N
E
S
 

OI
 
Is



  

  

Prior History 

A. The inmate's employment history, education, and 
occupational skills and training (including military 
training). 

B. The inmate's past illegal use of controlled substan- 
ces or past habitual and excessive use of alcohol. 

C. Any recommendations made by the sentencing 
court. 

D. The inmate's behavior and attitude during any pre- 
vious experience of probation or parole, and the 
recency of such experience. 

E. Circumstances of the offense for which the inmate is 
serving a sentence. 

F. Any protests or recommendations filed with the 
Board regarding the inmate's suitability for parole. 

G. Any record which the inmate may have of past 
offenses. 

H. The inmate's reputation in the community, 

Prison Record 
A. Theinmate's ability and readiness to assume obliga- 

tions and undertake responsibilities. 
"B. The inmate's vocational, educational, and other 

training since incarceration. 
C. The inmate's conduct during his term of imprison- 

ment, 5 
D. Any noticeable attitudinal change since the offense 

for which the inmate was incarcerated. 
E. The physical and emotional status of the inmate, 
F. The inmate's positive efforts on behalf of himself or 

on behalf of others. 

Forward View 

A. The inmate's family status, including whether his 
relatives display an interest in him or whether he has 
other close and constructive associations in the 
community. 

B. The type of residence, neighborhood, or commu- 
nity in which the inmate plans to live. 

C. The adequacy of the inmate's plans or prospects 
upon release. 

D. The availability of community resources to assist 
the inmate. 

Inmate Interview Program 
Before initial parole consideration every inmate is 

interviewed by a parole officer. Unfortunately, time 
does not permit any inmate before initial consideration 
to have an additional interview with a Board member, 
However, under a continuing program, an inmate (typ- 
ically a life sentence inmate) nearing his parole recon- 
sideration month is automatically selected for interview 
by a Board member if he meets certain criteria, which 
are available in writing on request. 

Recommendations for Parole 
Submitting recommendations or signatures on peti- 

tions is not necessary for favorable parole considera- 
tion, Views of persons familiar with a case are obtained 
through regular official investigations and kept confi- 
dential. The Board does not encourage an inmate or 
anyone acting in his behalf to scck a recommendation 
from a judge or prosecutor because such officials often 
do not consider that a proper judicial function. How- 
ever, the Board welcomes information from any source, 
public or private, which may shed additional light on a 
case. It welcomes voluntary recommendations and 
information from court and other public officials, from 
the inmate's relatives, neighbors, and friends, and from 
all others. 

Recommendations Against Parole 
The Board welcomes receiving all available infor- 

mation on a case, both favorable and unfavorable, and 

keeps such information and its source strictly confiden- 
tial. Recommendations against granting parole should 
be made in writing over the signature of the writer or in 
person, and all reasons for opposing parole should be 
fully explained. 

Residence and Employment Plans 
It is necessary that an inmate have an acceptable 

residence plan before his release on parole although not 
necessarily before the Board renders its decision. In 
addition, if at all possible, the inmate should have an 
acceptable employment offer. 

Out-of-State Parole 
Aninmate who wants to be paroled to another state 

should notify the Georgia State Board of Pardons and 
Paroles of his specific residence and employment plans, 
giving complete addresses. He may do this by informing 

the parole officer who interviews him for the Personal 
History Statement before his initial consideration or by 
writing directly to the Board. 

A prospective parolee has legitimate reasons to 
request out-of-State parole if he has been a resident of 
the proposed receiving state, if his family lives there, and 

if suitable employment can be arranged before his 
release, The proposed receiving state investigates the 
inmate's parole plans and decides whether to accept 
him for supervision. The Georgia Board must also 
approve the inmate's parole plans, and only the Georgia 
Board may grant parole, 

Detainer and Conditional Transfer 
A detainer indicating an inmate is wanted to face 

charges or serve a sentence may be filed with the 
Department of Corrections by authorities in Georgia, 
another state, the Federal system, or the military. 

A detainer does not prevent an inmate from being 
considered by the Parole Board. However, the Board 
considers.the inmate not for parole but for conditional 
transfer to the custody of the detaining authority, Only 
if the detaining authority released the person before the 
end of his Georgia sentence could his status, at the 
Board's discretion, become that of a parolee. 

Because detainers against Georgia inmates are filed 
with the Department of Corrections, all inquiries about 
them should be directed to that Department or to the 
detaining authority. 

I 

Waiver of Parole Consideration 
Aninmate may waive parole consideration by noti- 

fying the Board in writing. He may withdraw his waiver 
the same way but only after it has been in effect thirty 
days. 

An inmate thinking of temporarily waiving parole 
consideration should realize that a waiver halts or pre- 
vents pre-parole case investigations which may take 
months to complete. Therefore, after withdrawing his 
waiver, the inmate may have to wait several months 

before his case is ready for consideration, 

Parole Supervision 
When an inmate is paroled, he is placed initially 

under maximum parole supervision, meaning his parole 
officer sees him at least four times a month. The parole 
officer makes unscheduled visits to the parolee at home 
and on the job, and the parolee is required to report 
regularly to the local parole office. 

Supervision is the parole officer's main duty, How- 
ever, in addition to his surveillance role, the parole 
officer is a counselor who helps the parolee with any 
fumily, budget, or job-placement problems. When 
appropriate, he may also refer the parolee to other 

governmental or private agencies for assistance. 
If, despite all efforts to help the parolee become a 

productive member of society, the parolee does not 
respond to supervision and violates parole conditions, 
the parole officer assumes the role of an enforcement 
officer, He submits a report on the parolee's miscon- 
duct to the Field Operations Division central office, 
which may initiate revocation procedures. 

Georgia parole officer candidates are required to 
have four-year college degrees. They receive intensive 
basic training, which meets requirements of the Georgia 

Peace Officer Standards and Training Act, in firearms, 

arrest procedures, ethics, investigation and supervision 
procedures, surveillance techniques, and constitutional 
law, among other subjects. Parole officers are certified 
as peace officers with authority to carry lircarms and 
arrest parolees. 

Supervision Fee and Restitution 
A standard parole condition requires a parolee to 

pay a $10 monthly parole supervision fee and any 
Board-ordered restitution and to begin paying any 
court-ordered payments while on parole, 

Persons who are physically able to work or who 
are financially able to pay are required to pay the 
supervision fee. The Board has the authority to 
change the amount of this fee as long as it is uniform 
statewide, : 

Inan appropriate case the Board may also order a 
series of restitution payments to a crime victim, 

All persons whose sentences include payment of 
victim restitution, fincs, or court costs are encouraged 
to begin making these payments upon release on 
parole. The purpose is to place such payments in the 
popes hands sooner and to help ensure payment in 
ull, : 

The Board concentrates on cases in which the 
parolees owe $25,000 or more in court-ordered 
restitution or fines. Typically, these are drug 
trafficking cases. Such parolees are required to begin 

    

making payments upon release. 
Parole officers direct their parolees to make their 

court-ordered payments to local probation offices, 
which maintain records and distribute funds. 

The Board also reserves the right, in appropriate 
cases, to require payment of any court-ordered 
amount as a precondition to being released on parole. 

Arrest of Parolee 
When a parolee has reportedly violated a condition 

of his release, a Board warrant may be issued for his 

arrest. If the alleged violation is absconding from parole 
supervision or if the parolee is otherwise not available 
to the Board for a hearing, a temporary revocation 
order may be issued. This order suspends the running of 
the sentence from the date of the order, 

Preliminary Hearing for Alleged Violator 
A parolee arrested on a Board warrant for allegedly 

violating a parole condition is afforded a preliminary 
hearing within a reasonable time at or near the place of 
the alleged violation before a Board hearing officer not 
directly involved in the case. The purpose of the pre- 
liminary hearing is to determine whether there is proba- 
ble cause to believe the parolee violated a parole condi- 
tion and whether he should be held under arrest 
pending the Board's decision on revocation. 

A preliminary hearing is not required if the parolee 
is not under arrest on a Board warrant, has absconded 
from supervision, has signed a waiver of preliminary 
hearing, has admitted any alleged violation to any 
Board representative in the presence of a third party 

who is not a Board representative, or has been con- 
victed of any new crime in a Georgia court, a court of 
another state, or a Federal court. 

The parolee is given written notice of the prelimi- 
nary hearing, allowing reasonable time to prepare his 
case. The parolee may retain counsel to represent him at 
the preliminary hearing. The parolee may present wit- 
nesses and documentary evidence in his own behalf, 
and he may cross-cxamine adverse witnesses unless the 
hearing officer determines that a witness would be sub- 
jected to risk of harm if his identity were disclosed. The 
parolee is invited to make statements and answer ques- 
tions but is not required to do so, 

The hearing officer may issue subpoenas to compel 
the attendance of witnesses resident within the county 
ol the alleged violation, He may also issue subpoenas 
for the production of documents or other written evi- 
dence at the hearing, 

After the preliminary hearing the hearing officer 
submits to the Board a written report on the testimony, 
on his findings, and on any decision to release the 

parolee on his personal recognizance. By majority vote 
the Board ratifies or overrules the hearing officer's find- 
ings and any decision to release and decides whether to 
hold a final hearing. 

Final Hearing for Alleged Violator 
A parolee charged with violating a parole condition 

is afforded a final hearing within a reasonable time 
before the Board. The purpose of the final hearing is to 
determine whether the parolee has violated a parole 
condition and whether the violation warrants parole 
revocation. 

A final hearing is not required if the parolee has 
admitted the violation and signed a waiver of final 
hearing or has been convicted of or entered a plea of 
guilty or nolo contendere to a felony or misdemeanor in 
a Georgia court of record. In such case the Board may, 
revoke parole without a hearing, 

In addition, if a parolee, freed on his personal re- 
cognizance, fails to appear at his final hearing, the 
Board may summarily revoke his parole. 

The parolee is given written notice of the final hears 
ing, allowing reasonable time to prepare his case, At the 
final hearing the parolee has the same rights a parolee 
has at a preliminary hearing as specified above, 

The Board may subpoena witnesses from through- 
out Georgia to appear at the final hearing and may issue 
subpoenas for the production of documents or other 
written evidence at the hearing. 

After the final hearing the Board decides by major- 
ity vote whether to continue or revoke parole, 

Discharge from Parole 
When a person is released on parole, his projected 

prison discharge date becomes his projected date for 
discharge from parole supervision. 

When discharge from parole occurs, if all sentences 
from all jurisdictions have been completed, including 
any court-ordered payment, and if no criminal charge is 
pending, the Board's discharge order includes a Resto- 
ration of Civil and Political Rights, 

3 
aa

d 
d
a
r
a
 ot 

N 
A
L
I
 
M
i
 

ar 
tran

 
“ 

’ 
: 

2 

A
S
 

A
 

L
A
D
 

uo 
A
e
 

=



  

hi
a 

cn 
ab
et
 
r
m
a
 

  

Early Discharge from Parole 
The Board may grant an early discharge from 

parole, upon recommendation from a parole officer, 
when his parolee has served four years on parole on a 

life sentence with a satisfactory adjustment in society or 
three years on parole on a life sentence with an exem- 
plary adjustment in society; or when the parolee has 
served three years on parole on a lesser sentence with a 
satisfactory adjustment in society or two years on 
parole on a lesser sentence with an exemplary adjust- 
ment in society. A parolee who meets these require- 

ments may apply to the Board through his parole 

officer for a discharge from parole which includes a 
commutation of his remaining prison sentence to time 
served. 

Reprieve 
Reprieve is the temporary suspension of a prison 

sentence to release an offender under conditions which, 
if violated, permit his reimprisonment. The State Board 
of Pardons and Paroles may grant a compassionate 

reprieve, medical reprieve, maternity reprieve, educa- 
tional reprieve, and reprieves for other suitable reasons. 

A reprieve, unlike a parole, is a sentence suspension, 
but the Board usually credits reprieve time to an 
inmate's sentence if he obeys reprieve conditions. How- 
ever, a reprievee returned to prisor as a reprieve viola- 
tor receives no credit on his sentence for any time spent 
on reprieve, 

Compassionate Reprieve 
A compassionate reprieve is a release from prison 

fora few hours ora few days to allow an inmate to visit 
a critically or terminally ill member of his immediate 
family, to visit an immediate family member undergo- 
ing a critical operation, to attend the funcral of a 
member of his immediate family, or for other reasons 
the Board deems appropriate. 

A request for a compassionate reprieve may be 
submitted to the Board's central office in person, by 
letter, or by telephone. During non-office hours, a 

request may be telephoned to the Board's duty officer 
through Stone Mountain Correctional Institution, 

The request should include the name of the critically 
ill patient and his illness or the name of the deceased, 
the telephone number of the physician or funeral dirce- 
tor who will confirm this information, the relation of 
the patient or deceased to the inmate, the hospital 
where the patient is being treated or the date, time, and 
location of the funeral, the proposed residence during 
the reprieve, and the travel arrangements, 

A prison warden, following policy set by the 
Department of Corrections, may for similar reasons 
authorize an emergency special leave. Therefore, an 
inmate thinking of requesting a compassionate reprieve 
from the Board should first request from his warden, if 
Department of Corrections policy permits, an emer- 
gency special leave. 

Medical Reprieve 
A medical reprieve may be granted to an inmate 

shown to be suffering from an illness for which neces- 
sary treatment is available only outside the State prison 
system or to an inmate in deteriorating condition from 
a terminal illness. The written request for such a 

reprieve should be submitted to the Board through the 
Department of Corrections, which should medically 
document the need for the reprieve. The request should 
also include the plan for residence, medical care, and 
payment of medical expenses. 

Maternity Reprieve 
A maternity reprieve is a temporary release from 

prison to allow an inmate to give birth to her baby 
outside prison and to nurture the child for a short 
period after birth, 

A request for a maternity reprieve must be received, 
depending on where the inmate is housed, from the 
counselor designated to handle reprieve requests at the 
Georgia Women's Correctional Institution, from a 
counselor at a women's transitional center, or from a 
sheriff or jailor in charge of a county jail. 

A maternity reprieve request should include a 
signed statement from the inmate asking for the 
reprieve, a copy of the physician's report giving the 
estimated date of confinement to have the baby, and a 
letter from the person responsible for medical costs and 
residence for the inmate and her baby. 

The usual length of a maternity reprieve is 60 days, 
extending from 30 days before the expected delivery 
date to 30 days after this date. If an inmate gives birth 
before a reprieve can start, the Board will consider a 

request for a 30-day reprieve to allow the inmate to take 
her baby home and make arrangments for the baby's 
care when she returns to prison. 

Educational Reprieve 
Ancducational reprieve is an earlier-than-scheduled 

release from prison to allow an inmate to enter a col- 
lege, university, technical school, or other educational 
institution which has accepted him for enrollment. The 
Board may consider a request for an educational . 
reprieve for up to 90 days before an inmate's discharge 
date or tentative parole month. 

The written request for an educational reprieve 
must include a letter of acceptance from the school, a 

suitable residence plan, and proof of the inmate's finan- 
cial ability to attend school full time. 

Inmates serving for capital offenses, sex offenses, or 
drug sales are not eligible to apply for consideration. 

Commutation 
Commutation is the reduction of a sentence to a 

lesser sengence. 
NL - 

Commutation of Unjust Sentence 
The State Board of Pardons and Paroles considers 

commuting a prison sentence only when it receives 
substantial written evidence that the sentence is either 
excessive or constitutes a miscarriage of justice, With- 
out convincing evidence to the contrary, the Board 
presumes that a sentence is fair and correct. 

The Superior Courts Sentence Review Panel is 
another agency which considers reducing a sentence, 
The Parole Board normally does not consider a come 
mutation request while an application to that Panclor a 
court appeal is pending. 

Commutation of Death Sentence 
Before court appeals of a capital punishment case 

have ended, the Board obtains complete information 
about the circumstances of the offense and the criminal 
history. 

Application for commutation of a death sentence 
may be in any written form and must contain grounds 
on which the application is based. After receiving the 
application and after court appeals have ceased or have 
neared exhaustion, the Board decides whether or not to 

consider commutation, If the decision is to consider 
commutation and sufficient time does not remain for a 
complete and fair review of the case, the execution of 
the death sentence is suspended for a period not exceed- 
ing 90 days to allow time for the review. This review 
may or may not include a hearing, 

The Georgia Constitution states that a person 
whose death sentence is commuted by the Roard to life 
imprisonment (in 1977 or later) cannot be pardoned or 
paroled before serving 25 years. 

Remission 
Remission of a sentence, as granted by the State 

Board of Pardons and Paroles, is the lessening of the 
duration of confinement without reducing the length of 
sentence. The Board may remit all or part of a confine- 
ment sentence to require it be served under parole 
supervision, 

Violation and Hearings 
An offender whose confinement sentence was re- 

mitted by the Board and who is accused of violating a 

  

PAROLE BOARD 
DOES NOT RUN PRISONS 

The State Board of Pardons and Paroles has no 
responsibility to run the State prison system, 
Only the Department of Corrections adminis. 
ters the prisons, transfers an inmate from one 
prison to another, assigns an inmate to prison 
programs, makes an inmate a trusty, gives an 
inmate a furlough at special times like Thanks- 
giving and Christmas, computes time to be 
served, issues time sheets, provides medical care, 
grants visiting and mail privileges, and takes 
prison disciplinary action. The Parole Board is 
not responsible for any of those things, Ques- 
tions about those things should be directed to 
the Department of Corrections; Floyd Veterans 
Memorial Building; Eighth Floor, East Tower; 2 

M.L. King, Jr., Drive, S.E.; Atlanta, Georgia 
30334.     
  

   
condition of release will be subject to the same arrest 
and hearing procedures and afforded the same rights 
applicable to an accused parole violator, 

Pardon 
A pardon is a declaration of record by the State 

Board of Pardons and Paroles that a person is relieved 
from the legal consequences of a particular conviction. 

"It restores civil and political rights and removes legal 
disabilities resulting from the conviction. 

Basis for Granting Pardon 
A pardon may be granted in two instances: 

|. A pardon may be granted to a person who, to 
the Board's satisfaction, proves his innocence of 
the crime for which he was convicted under 
Georgia law, Newly available evidence proving 
the person's complete justification or non-guilt 
may be the basis for granting a pardon. Applica- 
tion may be submitted in any written form any 
time after conviction. 

2. A pardon which does not imply innocence may 
be granted to an applicant convicted under 
Georgia law who has completed his full sentence 

obligation, including serving any probated sen- 

tence and paying any court-ordered payment, 

and who has thereafter completed five years 
without any criminal involvement. The five- 
year waiting period after sentence completion 
may be waived if the waiting period is shown to 
be detrimental to the applicant's livelihood by 
delaying his qualifying for employment in his 
chosen profession. Application must be made 
by the ex-offender on a form available from the 
Board on request, 

No pardon is automatic; the Board judges the mer- 
its of cach individual case. 

Removal of Disabilities 
Under Georgia law a person convicted of a “felony 

involving moral turpitude” loses his civil and political 
rights, including the right to vote, the right to hold 
public office, nnd the right to serve ona jury, Under the 

1983 State Constitution the right to vote is restored 
automatically to ex-offenders who have completed 
their sentences. 

Using an application form available on request, a 
person who was convicted under Georgia law may 
apply to the State Board of Pardons and Paroles for a 
Restoration of Civil and Political Rights. If the person 
was convicted under another state's law or under Fed- 
cral law but is residing in Georgia and wishes to exercise 
civiland political rights in this State, he also may apply. 

Restoration of Civil and Political Rights 
A Restoration of Civil and Political Rights carries 

no implication of innocence. Iomay be granted only toa 
person who has completed his full sentence or, with no 
probation unserved ar court-ordered payment unpaid, 

has completed four years on Georgia parole on a life 
sentence with a satisfactory adjustment in society (three 
years with exemplary adjustment) or completed three 
years on Georgia parole on a lesser sentence with a 
satisfactory adjustment in society (two years with 
exemplary adjustment). 

Automatic Rights Restoration 
The Board automatically restores civil and political 

rights to a felony parolee upon discharge from parole if 
he has no other sentence to serve, court-ordered pay- 
ment to pay, or pending criminal charge against him. 

: Restoration of Fircarm Right 
Under both Georgia law and federal law, 

conviction of a felony removes the right to receive, 
possess, and transport a firearm, A pardon applicant 
or rights-restoration applicant, normally at least five 

years after sentence completion, may request that the 
pardon or restoration be specially worded to restore 
this fircarm right, but he must provide in detail his 
reason for the request. 

Board policy is to deny restoration of the firearm 
right to an applicant who possessed a firearm during 
the commission of any offense. 

As an alternative to applying for a Georgia 
restoration of the fircarm right, a person may apply 
for a federal restoration of this right through the 
Burcau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms of the 
United States Department of the Treasury. 

Published June 1989 §1,3729/10M    



  

  

  

  
  

     
An inmate serving a noo-tife sentence whose case 

has been coasidered under Parole Decision Guidelines 

receives a Notice of Tentative Action. It leads him step 
by step 10 show him how and why the Board arrived at 

its tentative decision. If be thinks an error bas been 

made in the Guidelines computations, he has 30 days in 
which he may request 

An inmate serving 8 Me sentence who is denied 
parole is sent a letter informing him of the decision and 

Os the same ¢3) aa tamate) parole ceruficate u 

fosmed, be 8 seat 3 tier informing hia of hi tentative 

ree dace, whch © approximately fourteen gays 

- 208 10 is always tenuative an 

cipensob : rast jar S for cause prior to the 

imate) reas 

Work Release and Alcohol-Drug Treatment 
When considering an inmate for parole, the Board 

may vote tentatively for parole on condition that the 
inmate successfully completes the Department of Cor- 
rections’ work release program first, which usually 
takes about four months. The inmate is notified that he 
is being recommended to that Department for work 
release. 

In the same way, the Board during parole consider- 
ation may recommend an inmate for the Department of 
Corrections’ alcohol and drug treatment program, 

which, upon successful completion, may lead to parole. 
; The only time the Board normally may consider 

! recommending an inmate for these programs is when 
the Board sets a Tentative Parole Month or when an 
inmate reaches his Tentative Parole Month but needs 
to develop a parole residence plan. 

Consideration of Lifer After Parole Denizl 
A life-sentence inmate who is denied parole is sche- 

duled for his next parole consideration not more than 
cight years later, 

Consideration After Escape 
An inmate who has escaped will not be considered 

for parole until his return to custody of Georgia prison 
authorities. If a life-sentence inmate was considered for 
parole before his escape, he is scheduled for his next 
consideration one to cight years after recapture. 

Consideration After Parole Revocation 
A person returned to prison after parole revocation 

is scheduled for parole consideration six months to one 
year after revocation if he has sufficient confinement 
time remaining or unless a new sentence supersedes the 
revoked sentence for the purpose of computing parole 
cligibility or unless the Board directs otherwise. 

Exceptional Parole Consideration 
An inmate or his representative may apply to the 

Board in any written form presenting substantial evi- 
dence as to why the inmate should be considered or 
reconsidered for parole before the scheduled time. 
However, the Board must adhere to the four numbered 
provisions of law listed in Time-Served Rules for 
Parole Consideration on page |. In determining whether 
to consider the case as an exception, the Board weighs 
tle following: 

|. A substantial showing that the sentence is exces- 
sively harsh or that a miscarriage of justice has 
occurred. 

2. A substantial showing of the necessity for 
carlicr-than-scheduled consideration to promote 
rehabilitation of the inmate. For example, such 
showing may include the inmate's proposed 
admission, within three months of the regular 
parole consideration date or tentative parole 
month, into a college, university, technical 
school, or other educational institution which 
has accepted him for enrollment, Consideration 
is given to the recommendation of the Depart- 
ment of Corrections, convincing evidence that 
the inmate could and would improve his situa- 
tion through earlier release and that he has 
already made substantial progress toward reha- 
bilitation and would abide by the rules of a free 
society, and convincing evidence that continued 
imprisonment of the inmate would serve no 
beneficial purpose, 

The Board emphasizes that family circumstances, 
> 

    

business affairs, hardship, sickness, need, and other 

reasons shared almost universally by inmates are not 

such evidence on which the Board makes an exception. 

The Board considers a sentence imposed by a court 

10 be fair, just, and correct unless there is a substantial 

showing to the contrary. 

Notification of Judge, D.A., and Sheriff 
Before making a decision on whether to parole an 

inmate, the Board carefully reviews any comments 

from court officials. It actively solicits such comments, 
bebeving they can lead to better decisions. 

The Board requires a parole officer beginning a 
pre-parole Legal Investigation of an inmate's offense to 
send a letter to the district attorney or assistant district 
attorney who prosecuted the case. The letter encour- 
ages the prosecutor to comment and, in particular, 
“share his knowledge of any aggravating or mitigating 
circumstarices. If the prosecutor gives his response 
promptly, it is made a part of the Legal Investigation 
report. If it arrives later, it is sent to the Board's central 
office as a supplement to the report. 

If the Board is to consider paroling an inmate before 
he has served the time required for automatic initial 
consideration, the Board notifies in writing, at least ten 
days before formal consideration, the sentencing judge 
and district attorney of the county where the inmate 
was sentencéd to give them an opportunity to express 
their views, 

After the Board issucs a parole order, a notice of 
parole is within 72 hours sent to the presiding judge, 
district attorney, sheriff of the county of conviction, 
and sheriff of the county of the parolec's last residence if 
this was in Georgia. If a Victim Impact Statement has 
been filed with the Board and the offense was a crime 
against the person, the victim is notified also. 

When the Board seriously considers commuting an 
inmate's prison sentence, it notifies the sentencing judge 
and invites him to express his views on the proposed 
action, 

Victim Impact Statement and Notification 
A crime victim may obtain from a prosecuting 

attorney a form called a Victim Impact Statement and 
may fill it out, citing any physical, psychological, or 
economic injury to the victim caused by the defendant. 
The victim should give the completed Statement to the 
prosecuting attorney, who files it with the Court and 
makes it available to the defendant for rebuttal, 

If the victim is unable to use the form because of 
mental, emotional, or physical incapacity or because of 
the victim's age or because the victim is deceased, the 
victim's attorney or a family member may complete the 
form on behalf of the victim. 

Except in cases in which life imprisonment or the 
death penalty must be imposed, a judge may consider 
this Statement in determining the appropriate sentence, 
including any order of restitution to the victim, if the 
defendant, in committing a felony, caused physical, 
psychological, or economic injury to the victim or if the 
defendant, in committing a misdemeanor, caused serious 
physical injury or death to the victim, 

Under the same circumstances listed in the above 
paragraph, the Court may allow the victim or his repre- 
sentative to make an oral Victim Impact Statement in 
the presence of the defendant, who has the opportunity 
to rebut it. 

If the defendant is sentenced to prison, the prosceut- 
ing attorney makes the Statement available to the State 
Board of Pardons and Paroles for review during parole 
consideration. If it is a crime against the person, such as 
rape or armed robbery, the Parole Board notifiés the 
victim of any final decision to grant parole. The victim 
is responsible for sending written notice of any change 
in his mailing address directly to the Parole Board. 

If the victim does not submit a written Victim 
Impact Statement to the prosecuting attorney belore 
sentencing, he still may submit it to the Parole Board 
before parole consideration, which may occur as carly 
as four months after imprisonment. wy 

Apart from using the above form, a victim or rela- 
tive of a victim may always submit a confidential letter 
directly to the Parole Board providing information and 
requesting notification of any tentative release decision. 

Pre-Parole Investigations 
Before the Board considers an inmate for parole, it 

conducts investigations, detailed reports of which 
become a part of the Board's case file, which is separate 
from files maintained by the Department of Corrections. 

First, a parole officer studies arrest and court 
records and may talk with arresting officers, court offi- 
cials, victims, and witnesses so he can write a Legal 

  

  

PAROLE DECISION 1 
GUIDELINES 

Parole Decision Guidelines help the State Board 
of Pardons and Paroles make a more consistent, 
soundly based, and understandable parole 
decision on an inmate serving a sentence less 
than life imprisonment. Guidelines help the 
Board decide on a Tentative Parole Month for 
the inmate or decide that he will complete his 
sentence without parole, 

A Board hearing examiner identifies an inmate's 

Crime Severity Level from a table of offenses 
ranked in seven levels from lowest to highest 
severity. The higher the severity, the longer the 
inmate is recommended to serve. Then the hear- 
ing examiner calculates the inmate's Parole 
Success Likelihood Score by adding weighted 
factors with proven predictive value from the 
inmate's criminal and social history. A history 
of things such as prior imprisonment, parole or 
probation failure, heroin use or possession, and 
joblessness would increase the risk of paroling 
the inmate and cause him to be recommended 
for longer confinement. 

The hearing examiner inserts the inmate's Crime 
Severity Level and Parole Success Likelihood 
Score into a Guidclines Chart, which, also 
weighing sentence length and prison capacity, 
recommends how long the inmate should be 
confined. This translates into either a recom- 
mendation for parole denial or for a Tentative 
Parolc Month in the future. 

By majority vote the Parole Board members 

either agree with the Guidelines recommenda- 
tion or, for a stated reason, depart from it and 
make an independent decision. Then they send 
the inmate a notice explaining their decision and 
emphasizing that any ‘Tentative Parole Month is 

conditioned on good conduct in prison. Usually 

on the recommendation of the Department of 
Corrections, misconduct results in parole post- 
poncment or cancellation. 

Parole Guidelines help keep the Board on track 

toward its goal of seeing that inmates serving for 
similar offenses with similar histories are treated 
the same,       

Investigation report on the details of the inmate's cur- 

rent offense and a summary of any prior offenses in the 
same county, 

Next, a parole officer interviews the inmate and 
completes a Personal History Statement questionnaire, 
The inmate is asked, among other things, where he has 
resided, attended school, and worked; who his family 
members arc and where they live; whom he has chosen 
as references; where he plans to live and work; and what 
his own account is of his crime. 

Finally, a parole officer conducts a Social Investiga- 

tion, which includes interviews with persons mentioned 
inthe Personal History Statement as well as others. The 
written report presents a revealing picture of the 
inmate's life from birth to current imprisonment and 
may also indicate the degree of his truthfulness. 

Before the inmate is paroled, the Board receives a 
Parole Review Summary from the Department of Cor- 
rections. This discusses the inmate's behavior, attitude, 
physical status, mental and emotional condition, partic. 
ipation in activitics, and performance in work and 
training. 

The Board may, at its discretion, request detailed 
psychological and/or psychiatric opinions before con- 
sidering a case. 

Other documents in the case file usually include a 
Federal Bureau of Investigation or Georgia Crime 
Information Center record of arrests and convictions, 
Classificationand Admission Summary (on the inmate's 
condition when he entered prison), Disciplinary Reports, 
all letters received, and summaries of information from 
central office visitors. 

Important Factors in Parole Decision 
Certain factors have been designated by the Board 

as especially important when a person is considered for 
parole. The Board will not parole an inmate if there is 
substantial reason to believe he will engage in further 
criminal conduct or will not conform to specified condi- 
tions of parole. Inits thorough and impartial investiga- 
tions the Board will take into account any or all of the 
following factors: : 

 



   
    

      

    

    

   
   

   
   

     
   

    
      

      
   

       

  

[C
PE
 

R
A
N
 

ve
s 

  

PAROLE SUCCESS FACTORS 

ITEM A. AGE AT FIRST COMMITMENT 

(26 or over = 5) 
{22 =-:25 = 3) 

(18 - 21 = 2) 

(17 or less = 0) 

ITEM B.., PRIOR CONVICTIONS (JUVENILE AND ADULT) 

(None = 3) 

(1 = 2) ”. * 

{2 -.3 = 1) 
(4 or more = 0) 

ITEM C. PRIOR INCARCERATION SINCE AGE 17 

(None = 2) 
(1 = 1) 

(2 or more = 0) 

PAROLE AND PROBATION FAILURE 

(No Failures = 4) 
(Probation Only = 2) 

(Parole Only = 1) 

(Both = 0)     

       

      

      

      

NO USE, POSSESSION OR ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN HEROIN OR OPIATE DRUGS = 1 

OTHERWISE = 0 

   COMMITMENT OFFENSE DID NOT INVOLVE BURGLARY OR FORGERY = 2 
OTHERWISE = 0 

   FULLY EMPLOYED DURING 6 MONTHS PRECEDING CURRENT OFFENSE = 1 
OTHERWISE = 0 

   HAD WRAT SCORE OF 8 OR HIGHER AT TIME OF DIAGNOSTIC TESTING = 2 
OTHERWISE = 0 

  

    
      

  

a
 

ar 
2 
R
a
m
a
n
 A 

ba
 

Sr
 

2 H
A
I
 A 

a 
FR

 
A
A
 
S
A
A
 
Y
N
 

    
  

—~
en
em
' 

oe



  

    F
I
E
R
A
 

C
H
O
I
R
S
 

EA
 T

ET
 
A
L
L
 

A
E
 

at
 
S
C
 
B
l
 

  

CRIME SEVERITY LEVELS 

The Crime Severity Level is selected from the table of offenses listed below. If the offense is not listed, the Severity Level 

containing the most similar listed offense is chosen. 

If the Board determines that the inmate is serving for an "attempted" offense, the offense will be rated one (1) severity level less 

than the level where the actual offense is listed. 

If the inmate is serving for multiple offenses, the most serious offense will determine the Crime Severity Level. If serving for 
parole/probation revocation based on the commission of a new offense, the Crime Severity Level will be determined by that 

offense. i; 

LEVEL 1 
  

Bad Checks - under $2,000 
Burglary - less than $300, not in residential dwelling, single count 
Credit Card Theft 
Criminal Interference with Government Property 
Escape/Custody - no weapon, aiding escape 

Forgery II - possession, 10 or fewer counts or less than $1,000 
Habitual Violator 
Posscssion/passing forged prescriptions - 1st offense 

Possession of tools to commit a crime 

Theft - under $1,000 

Theft of Vehicle - not to sell; 1 count, 1st offense 

VGCSA - possession - single offense 

LEVEL II 
  

Bad Checks - $2,000 or more 

Burglary - unoccupied dwelling, $300 to $2,000, single count 

Communicating Gambling Information 
Credit Card Fraud - 10 or fewer counts or less than $1,000 

Criminal Damage II - $300 to $2,000 
Forgery | - 10 or fewer counts or less than $1,000 
Possession of an Illegal Firearm or Explosives 
Theft - $1,000 0 $4,999 
Theft of Vehicle - not for sale, 2nd offense 

VGCSA - possession, 2nd offense 
VGCSA - salc/intent w sell/disuribution, 1st offense 

LEVEL ITI 
  

Burglary - occupied dwelling, or 2 to § counts, or $2,001 0 $5,000 
Credit Card Fraud - more than 10 counts or $1,000 
Criminal Damage - life in danger or over $2,000 
Forgery | - over 10 counts or $1,000 or more 
Homicide by Vehicle 

Involuntary Manslaughter 
Terroristic Threats 
Theft - $5,000 to $10,000 
Theft of Vehicle - for sale or 2 to 3 counts without intent to sell or 

third offense 
VGCSA - sale, 2nd offense or third drug possession 
Obstruction of Officers - Felony 

LEVEL IV 
  

Arson II - $2,000 
Burglary - over $5,000, or 6 or more counts 
Enticing a Child 
Theft of Vehicle - 4 or more counts or 4th or greater offense 
Theft - over $10,000 

LEVEL V 
  

Aggravated Assault 

Arson | 
Child Molestation or Statutory Rape 
Cocaine related violations of GCSA-28 10 199 grams® 

Cruelty to Children 

Homicide by Vehicle while DUI or Hab Violator 
Incest 
Marijuana-rclated violations of GCSA-100 to 1,999 pounds* 
Opiate-reluted violations of GCSA 4 to 13 prums® 

Robbery 
VGCSA - sale/distribution/intent to sell Schedule Tor IT drugs 

2nd offense 

LEVEL VI 
  

Aggravated Child Molestation 
Aggravated Sodomy 
Cocaine-related violations of GCSA-200 w 399 grums® 

Kidnapping no ransom, no injury 
Muarijuana-related violations of GCSA-2,000) 10 9,999 pounds* 

Opiate-related violations of GCSA-14 to 27 grams* 
VGCSA - sale/distribution/intent to sell Schedule Tor 11 drugs 

3rd offense 
Voluntary Manslaughter 

LEVEL VII 
  

Armed Robbery - sentence not Life 
Cocaine-related violations GCSA-400 grams or more* 
Kidnapping - for ransom qr with injury, sentence not Life 
Marijuana-related violations GCSA 10,000 pounds or morc* 
Opiate-related violations of GCSA 28 grams or more* 
Rape - sentence not Life 
RICO Act 

*Bascd on the gross weight of any mixture containing a 

controlled substance. 

3 
a
l
a
n
 a

 
x 
d
n
a
 

3 
! 
t 

*
R
e
r
e
e
n
 

e
s
e
 

% 

 



  

    

   
    

    

  

   

  

    

  

    

     

         

       

        

       

   

Zi
o 

te
t 

Fo
 

=
 

A
&
E
 

  

    

  

STATE BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES 
PAROLE DECISION GUIDELINES 

NOTICE: THE BOARD SPECIFICALLY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION UNDER GEOR- 
GIALAW TO DENY PAROLE EVEN THOUGH GUIDELINES CRITERIA AREMET BY AN INMATE. ITISNOT THE 
INTENTION OF THE BOARD TO CREATE A "LIBERTY INTEREST" OF THE TYPE DESCRIBED IN GREENHOLTZ 
VS. NEBRASKA PENAL INMATES 442 US 1 (1979). 

Parole Decision Guidelines help the Board make a more consistent, soundly based, prompt, and explainable parole decision. 
Guidelines help the Board decide on a Tenfative Parole Month for the inmate or decide that the inmate will complete his 
sentence without parole, When making decisions, the Board may depart from the Guidelines recommendation and make an 

independent decision using the full discretion given it under Georgia Law. The length of the prison sentence imposed by the 
court will be considered in establishing a Tentative Parole Month, 

GUIDELINES RECOMMENDED MONTHS TO SERVE: Read across the Crime Severity Level and down from the Parole 
Success Likelihood Score to find the Guidelines'recommended months to serve. For Crime Severity Levels V, VIand VII, 
the Guidelines recommendation will be one-third of the court-imposed sentence length or the grid recommendation, whichever 
is greater. The Board, using its discretion in specific cases, may depart from the Guidelines recommendation, 

PAROLE SUCCESS LIKELIHOOD SCORE 
  

  

CRIME = 
SEVERITY EXCELLENT GOOD AVERAGE FAIR POOR 
LEVEL 13-20 11-12 9-10 6-8 0-5 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

                      

  

   
If the Board has agreed with the Guidelines Recommendation and the inmate believes the Crime Severity Level or any Parole 

Success Factor has been scored incorrectly he/she may ask the Board, within 30 days, to recompute the scores. The Board will 
consider any verifiable information submitted to substantiate the request, Such requests may be submitted in any written form 
and should be directed to the Parole Guidelines Director, State Board of Pardons and Paroles, Floyd Veterans Building, Fifth 

Floor East, 2 Martin Luther King, Jr, Drive, S.E., Atlanta, GA 30334, 

   
If the Board's tentative decision is to depart from the Guidelines recommendation and the number of months to serve is more 
than three years beyond the Guidelines recommendation, the case will be reviewed at the Guidelines recommendation and cach 
three years thereafter, 

    

      
     

   

Institutional conduct has not been evaluated at this time, The Board expects the inmate to use his/her time in confinement in 
a constructive manner, Exemplary conduct may result in a parole release prior to the scheduled release month, Institutional 
misconduct will result in a delay in a parole release or a decision not to parole, 

Rev, 191 

    e
r
 

eo 
A e
t
a
 in 

3 
2 

SU
L.
 

ar
il
 

Fe
 

A 
TU 

F
R
A
 
SA
H 

NR
 

TE
A 

ul
 

. 
ot

 
r
e
e
s
e
 

se
 

oa
 

B
s