Wallace v. State

A detective's testimony was sufficient to show that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights and gave a statement, even though the defendant had indicated at the time of his custodial interview that he had ingested cocaine a few hours earlier.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Edward Wallace was tried by a Fulton County jury and convicted of murder and other crimes, all in connection with the fatal shooting of Kyle Moore. Wallace appeals, contending that the evidence is legally insufficient to sustain his convictions, that the trial court erred when it admitted certain evidence at trial, and that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Upon our review of the record and briefs, we see no error, and we affirm.1

1. Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence shows that on the evening of May 3, 2007, Wallace, Maurice Aikens, and Ladasha Eison made plans to rob someone at a bus stop near a MARTA station. When Moore—an African-American high school student who was unknown to the assailants—arrived at the bus stop, Wallace and Aikens ran up to him and took his empty wallet and cell phone at gunpoint. Moore then was shot multiple times, and he died from his wounds soon afterwards. Eison told her co-workers about the robbery, identifying Wallace as the shooter. Two days after the shooting, Wallace had the words “unknown killer” tattooed onto his arm and confessed to his girlfriend that he had shot Moore. Ballistics testing confirmed that a 9mm handgun found by police officers in Wallace’s bedroom was the gun with which Moore was killed. During a custodial interview, Wallace admitted that he had purchased that gun a few months earlier. Police also found rap lyrics written recently by Wallace, in which he said that he targeted black people and that, if one would not act, Wallace would “lay ‘em flat” and “put eight holes in his back.”

Wallace v. State

A detective's testimony was sufficient to show that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights and gave a statement, even though the defendant had indicated at the time of his custodial interview that he had ingested cocaine a few hours earlier.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report