Rachals v. State

364 S.E.2d 867, 258 Ga. 48, 1988 Ga. LEXIS 129

Opinions

Weltner, Justice.

Terri Rachals was found guilty but mentally ill of the crime of aggravated assault. She was sentenced to twenty years in prison, and the Court of Appeals affirmed her conviction. Rachals v. State, 184 Ga. App. 420 (361 SE2d 671) (1987). We granted certiorari to determine whether there was a psychiatrist-patient relationship between Rachals and a certain physician that would have prohibited his testimony on behalf of the state.

The record establishes that the physician testified only at a Jackson-Denno hearing, from which the jury was excluded. The issue at that hearing was the voluntariness of Rachals’ confession. The trial court, finding that there was no police coercion in the obtaining of her confession or in the waiver of her Miranda rights, ruled that Rachals’ mental condition at such time was immaterial.

This ruling was correct. See Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U. S_ (107 SC 515, 93 LE2d 473) (1986).¹ The physician’s testimony, as well as his professional relationship with Rachals, was immaterial to the sole question of police coercion.²

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Smith, Gregory and Bell, JJ, who dissent.

Footnotes

1

“We hold that coercive police activity is a necessary predicate to the finding that a confession is not ‘voluntary’ within the meaning of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” 107 SC at 522. “Respondent urges this Court to adopt his ‘free will’ rationale, and to find an attempted waiver invalid whenever the defendant feels compelled to waive his rights by reason of any compulsion, even if the compulsion does not flow from the police. . . . Miranda protects defendants against government coercion leading them to surrender rights protected by the Fifth Amendment; it goes no further than that.” Id. at 524. “[A] defendant’s mental condition, by itself and apart from its relation to official coercion, should [never] dispose of the inquiry into constitutional ‘voluntariness.’ ” Id. at 520.

2

Further, because none of the questioned testimony was presented to the jury, Rachals could not have been harmed.