Raines v. White, 37835
| Decision Date | 04 November 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 37835,37835 |
| Parties | RAINES v. WHITE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
J. Dunham McAllister, McAllister & Roberts, Jonesboro, for Phil E. raines.
Charles J. Driebe, Jonesboro, James E. Thompson, Tucker, Harry A. Osborne, Jonesboro, Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., for Virginia Connell Evans, b/n/f Peggy White.
Appellant Raines is a defendant in a suit to determine paternity. See Code Ann. Chapter 74-3. Appellant denied being the father and objected to being ordered to submit to an "HLA" blood test. See Code Ann. § 74-306. 1 Appellant claims that Code Ann. § 74-306 violates the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article I, Section I, Paragraph XIII of the Georgia Constitution (Code Ann. § 2-113). The trial court ruled that the aforesaid code section does not violate either the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution 2 or Article I, Section I, Paragraph XIII of the Georgia Constitution. 3 We affirm.
Requiring appellant to submit to a blood test for the purpose of proving or disproving paternity, pursuant to Code Ann. § 74-306, would not compel appellant to be a witness against himself within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 760-765, 86 S.Ct. 1826, 1830-1833, 16 L.Ed.2d 908, nor would such procedure compel him "to give testimony tending in any manner to incriminate himself" within the meaning of the Georgia Constitution. Strong v. State, 231 Ga. 514, 519, 202 S.E.2d 428 (1973). Creamer v. State, 229 Ga. 511, 192 S.E.2d 350 (1972). 4
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur.
1 The section reads, in part, as follows: "As soon as practicable after an action has been brought the court upon motion of the plaintiff, the defendant, or any other interested party, may order the mother, the alleged father, and the child to submit to any blood tests, including human leucocyte antigen (HLA) testing if available, which have been developed or established for purposes of disproving or proving parentage and which are reasonably accessible."
2 "... nor shall any person ... be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself..."
3 "No person shall be compelled to give testimony tending in any manner to incriminate himself."
4 See also 21-A Am.Jur.2d, Criminal Law § 948. It is generally recognized that it is not a violation of the privilege against self-incrimination to require submission to blood...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ingram v. State
...in any manner to be self-incriminating" within the meaning of Art. I, Sec. I, Par. XVI of the Georgia Constitution. Raines v. White, 248 Ga. 406, 284 S.E.2d 7 (1981). 8. In enumeration 19, defendant complains that the prosecutor's closing argument improperly commented upon his failure to te......
-
Olevik v. State
...in accord with Day. See, e.g., Brown v. State, 262 Ga. 833, 836 (10), 426 S.E.2d 559 (1993) (1983 Constitution); Raines v. White, 248 Ga. 406, 284 S.E.2d 7 (1981) (1976 Constitution); Aldrich, 220 Ga. at 135, 137 S.E.2d 463 (1945 Constitution) ; Blackwell v. State, 67 Ga. 76, 78-79 (1) (188......
-
Elliott v. State
...Court under the Constitution of 1976 that continued Day’s and Calhoun’s interpretation of the scope of the right. See Raines v. White, 248 Ga. 406, 407, 284 S.E.2d 7 (1981) ; Strickland v. State, 247 Ga. 219, 224-225, 275 S.E.2d 29 (1981) ; Fouts v. State, 240 Ga. 39, 44 (3), 239 S.E.2d 366......
-
Rogers v. State
...Welch v. State, 254 Ga. 603(3), 331 S.E.2d 573 (1985); State v. Thornton, 253 Ga. 524(2), 322 S.E.2d 711 (1984); Raines v. White, 248 Ga. 406, 248 S.E.2d 7 (1981). 6. Rogers contends that the court should have sustained his motion for mistrial based upon a communication between a bailiff an......