Rucker v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Rucker v. State

416 S.E.2d 871, 203 Ga. App. 358, 1992 Ga. App. LEXIS 417

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 12, 1992

DocketA92A0598

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 416 S.E.2d 871 (Rucker v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rucker v. State, 416 S.E.2d 871, 203 Ga. App. 358, 1992 Ga. App. LEXIS 417 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

McMurray, Presiding Judge.

Defendant was convicted of cruelty to children and he appeals. Held:

1. The transcript reflects that during the prosecutor’s closing argument, defense counsel lodged an objection when the prosecutor commented on defendant’s failure to present witnesses on his behalf. The trial court overruled the objection. We find no error. Bryant v. State, 146 Ga. App. 43 (1) (245 SE2d 333). See also Lowe v. State, 253 Ga. 308, 309 (1) (319 SE2d 834); Smith v. State, 170 Ga. App. 673 (317 SE2d 626).

2. Defendant contends a Department of Family & Children Services caseworker should not have been permitted to testify that defendant admitted he “switched” the victim because defendant was in jail when the admission was made and the caseworker did not advise him of his Miranda (Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (86 SC 1602, 16 LE2d 694)) rights. This contention is without merit. It was not incumbent upon the caseworker to advise defendant of his Miranda rights because she was not a law enforcement officer. R. W. v. State of Ga., 135 Ga. App. 668, 671 (2) (218 SE2d 674). See also Grogins v. State, 154 Ga. App. 606 (2), 607 (269 SE2d 98).

Judgment affirmed.

Sognier, C. J., and Cooper, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

McMurray, Presiding Judge.

Defendant was convicted of cruelty to children and he appeals. Held:

1. The transcript reflects that during the prosecutor’s closing argument, defense counsel lodged an objection when the prosecutor commented on defendant’s failure to present witnesses on his behalf. The trial court overruled the objection. We find no error. Bryant v. State, 146 Ga. App. 43 (1) (245 SE2d 333). See also Lowe v. State, 253 Ga. 308, 309 (1) (319 SE2d 834); Smith v. State, 170 Ga. App. 673 (317 SE2d 626).

2. Defendant contends a Department of Family & Children Services caseworker should not have been permitted to testify that defendant admitted he “switched” the victim because defendant was in jail when the admission was made and the caseworker did not advise him of his Miranda (Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (86 SC 1602, 16 LE2d 694)) rights. This contention is without merit. It was not incumbent upon the caseworker to advise defendant of his Miranda rights because she was not a law enforcement officer. R. W. v. State of Ga., 135 Ga. App. 668, 671 (2) (218 SE2d 674). See also Grogins v. State, 154 Ga. App. 606 (2), 607 (269 SE2d 98).

Judgment affirmed.

Sognier, C. J., and Cooper, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

416 S.E.2d 871, 203 Ga. App. 358, 1992 Ga. App. LEXIS 417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rucker-v-state-gactapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack