Brown v. State

Summary

The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the denial of Dwight T. Brown's plea in abatement challenging the impartiality of grand jurors who were members of Cobb Electric Membership Corporation, an alleged victim of the charged crimes. The Court held that alleged bias or favor is a challenge propter affectum and does not provide grounds for abating an indictment, and further held that Brown waived his separate contention concerning an unresolved pre-indictment motion. Concurring and dissenting opinions addressed whether grand jurors should be unbiased and whether pre-indictment challenges to grand-juror bias should be available.

Holdings

1. A challenge propter affectum, based on a grand juror's favor, bias, prejudice, relationship, or financial interest in the particular prosecution, does not provide grounds for a plea in abatement of an indictment. A grand jury is an accusatory body and is not subject to the same impartiality requirement as a petit jury, except that statutory or other legally recognized capacity-based disqualifications may apply.
2. Brown waived his contention that the trial court was required to remove the Cobb EMC grand jurors before the second indictment because he failed to obtain a ruling on his pre-indictment motion.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a defendant may obtain abatement or dismissal of an indictment because grand jurors were allegedly biased or had a direct financial interest in the prosecution.
2. Whether the trial court was required to remove Cobb EMC members from the grand jury before the second indictment was returned.
3. Whether Brown preserved his challenge to the trial court's failure to rule on his pre-indictment motion.

Disposition

affirmed