Walker v. State, 76158
| Citation | 186 Ga.App. 765,368 S.E.2d 547 |
| Decision Date | 04 April 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 76158,76158 |
| Parties | WALKER v. The STATE. |
| Court | United States Court of Appeals (Georgia) |
Edward F. Hurley, Summerville, for appellant.
David L. Lomenick, Jr., Dist. Atty., Susan R. Sarratt, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
John Lewis Walker was convicted of violating the Georgia Controlled Substances Act and appeals contending that he was denied his right to a thorough and sifting cross-examination of the sheriff and that the trial court erred in admitting his confession into evidence.
1. The sheriff testified that the salary costs and expenses of undercover agents were borne by the GBI and that the Chattooga County Sheriff's Department is responsible for the expenses of the confidential informant. On cross-examination he testified as to the cost to the county and the state for the undercover operation, but when defense counsel asked where the agent was housed and the cost of his hotel expenses, the State objected on the basis that the place the agent stayed was confidential and the cost was immaterial.
" " Mullins v. State, 157 Ga.App. 204, 207, 276 S.E.2d 877 (1981). Dill v. State, 222 Ga. 793, 152 S.E.2d 741 (1966). As the testimony sought by the defendant was irrelevant, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by sustaining the State's objection. This enumeration is without merit.
2. A GBI agent advised appellant of his constitutional rights at the sheriff's office shortly after his arrest. He indicated that he understood his rights after having the opportunity to read the waiver form. He then made a statement to the officer that he may have sold marijuana, but he did not remember selling anything to Agent DeLoach.
A trial court's findings as to factual determinations and credibility relating to the admissibility of a confession will withstand attack on appeal unless they are clearly erroneous. Gates v. State, 244 Ga. 587, 590 261 S.E.2d 349 (1979). We find no error.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mathis v. State
...Johnson v. State, 186 Ga.App. 801, 803, 368 S.E.2d 562; accord Snipes v. State, 188 Ga.App. 366, 368, 373 S.E.2d 48; Walker v. State, 186 Ga.App. 765(2), 368 S.E.2d 547. 3. Appellant asserts that his character was illegally and improperly injected into evidence when the trial court allowed ......
-
Goolsby v. State
...to the admissibility of a confession will withstand attack on appeal unless they are clearly erroneous. [Cit.]" Walker v. State, 186 Ga.App. 765, 766(2), 368 S.E.2d 547 (1988). The trial judge's finding in this case was not clearly erroneous, and we therefore find no 2. Goolsby asserts as e......
-
Montgomery v. State, A07A1469.
...427 S.E.2d 560 (1993). 2. Henry v. State, 264 Ga. 861, 862(2), 452 S.E.2d 505 (1995). 3. (Citation omitted.) Walker v. State, 186 Ga. App. 765, 766(2), 368 S.E.2d 547 (1988). 4. Id. to support the factual findings.4 The trial court's findings that the confessions were admissible are support......
-
McDaniel v. State
...to the admissibility of a confession will withstand attack on appeal unless they are clearly erroneous. [Cit.]" Walker v. State, 186 Ga.App. 765, 766(2), 368 S.E.2d 547 (1988). We find no error with the trial court's admission of the statement. Appellant also contends that the written state......