Brown v. State

Casey v. State, 246 Ga. App. 786 2000 adversely decided the defendant's contention that the state could not use his incriminatory statement, which officers obtained in violation of his Miranda rights, in a search warrant's supporting affidavit.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

DNA evidence showed that the elderly female victim was attacked and raped by appellant Joseph T. Brown. A DeKalb County jury convicted Brown of rape, aggravated sexual battery, and battery, and the trial court denied his motion for new trial. On appeal, Brown claims that he was denied effective assistance from his trial counsel, who did not challenge the validity of the search warrant used to secure a sample of his DNA. Brown contends that his counsel should have challenged the affidavit supporting the search warrant because it allegedly contained unlawfully obtained information, false statements, and material omissions such that, when properly modified, the warrant failed to establish probable cause. We conclude that the trial court did not err in rejecting Brown’s ineffective assistance claim and therefore affirm. The record reflects that the victim was an eighty-five year old female who lived alone in a private residence in DeKalb County. The victim had suffered a stroke and had problems with her eyesight and hearing. She relied upon her son, who lived next door, to assist her with such things as preparing meals.

In the early afternoon of April 26, 2006, a young male, later identified through DNA evidence as Brown, approached the victim’s home and convinced her to let him come inside to use the restroom. After entering the home and using the restroom, Brown grabbed the victim, held her down, placed a pillow over her head, inserted his finger into her vagina, and raped her. After the attack, the victim’s face, neck, breasts, and arms were extensively bruised, and she was bleeding from the vaginal area.

Brown v. State

Casey v. State, 246 Ga. App. 786 2000 adversely decided the defendant's contention that the state could not use his incriminatory statement, which officers obtained in violation of his Miranda rights, in a search warrant's supporting affidavit.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report