From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hall v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
May 15, 1997
486 S.E.2d 710 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997)

Opinion

A97A0732.

DECIDED MAY 15, 1997.

Forfeiture. Richmond Superior Court. Before Judge Mulherin.

Peter D. Johnson, for appellant.

Daniel J. Craig, District Attorney, Charles R. Sheppard, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.


Suspecting Rodriquez Hall of drug activity, an Augusta police officer stopped him to ask questions. Hall voluntarily pulled from his pocket a bundle of cash totaling $3,800, which he told the officer he had earned "gambling in Hyde Park, throwing dice." Pursuant to OCGA § 16-12-32, the officer seized the money as contraband derived from gambling but did not charge Hall with any offense. After a bench trial, the trial court declared the money forefeited. Hall appeals, arguing that the evidence is insufficient to support the forfeiture because his "confession" to the source of the money was uncorroborated.

We find Hall's argument without merit and the evidence sufficient. Although an uncorroborated confession will not support a criminal conviction, OCGA § 24-3-53, a forfeiture action is a civil proceeding. See Murphy v. State, 267 Ga. 120, 121 ( 475 S.E.2d 907) (1996). The State, as plaintiff, was required to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence rather than by the higher burden of proof applicable to criminal cases. Griffin v. State of Georgia, 211 Ga. App. 750 (2) ( 440 S.E.2d 483) (1994). In a civil case, an out-of-court confession is an admission against interest, and its introduction into evidence makes out a prima facie case for the plaintiff. See Clark v. Toms, 181 Ga. App. 557 ( 353 S.E.2d 54) (1987); Edwards v. Bullard, 131 Ga. App. 34, 37 (3) ( 205 S.E.2d 115) (1974). Here, Hall's statement constituted an admission that the $3,800 was "derived from" gambling and was subject to forfeiture. See OCGA § 16-12-32 (b). With the State's prima facie case complete, the trial court was authorized to find in the State's favor and declare these funds forfeited. See Rabern v. State of Georgia, 221 Ga. App. 874, 877-78 (3) ( 473 S.E.2d 547) (1996).

Judgment affirmed. Johnson and Blackburn, JJ., concur.


DECIDED MAY 15, 1997.


Summaries of

Hall v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
May 15, 1997
486 S.E.2d 710 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997)
Case details for

Hall v. State

Case Details

Full title:HALL v. STATE OF GEORGIA

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: May 15, 1997

Citations

486 S.E.2d 710 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997)
486 S.E.2d 710

Citing Cases

Walker v. State

Cf. Hall v. State of Ga. (civil forfeiture under OCGA § 16-12-32 — forfeiture statute for property used in…

Sanders v. State

Hall v. State of Ga.Hall v. State of Ga., 226 Ga. App. 486, 487 ( 486 S.E.2d 710) (1997). Sanders' argument…