Skip to main content

BANKSTON v. STATE

Reset A A Font size: Print

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

BANKSTON v. The STATE.

No. A01A0681.

Decided: April 11, 2001

Sullivan & Sturdivant, Harold A. Sturdivant, Griffin, for appellant. William T. McBroom III, Dist. Atty., Daniel A. Hiatt, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.

 Convicted of statutory rape,1 Marvin James Bankston appeals on two grounds:  the trial court erred in admitting his confession to having sexual intercourse with his 14-year-old daughter, and the evidence was therefore insufficient to sustain the conviction.   The arresting officer testified that he gave Bankston Miranda warnings before the interrogation that led to the confession, that Bankston signed a waiver form acknowledging such, and that the officer made no promises or threats.   Despite Bankston's testimony to the contrary, the court was authorized to believe the officer that the proper warnings were given before the interrogation.2  Thus, the trial court did not clearly err in finding the confession was voluntarily given after a knowing and intelligent waiver of his rights.3  Corroborated by the confession, the victim's testimony that Bankston had sexual intercourse with her when she was 14 sufficed to sustain the conviction.4  We affirm.

Judgment affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Bankston was also found guilty of child molestation and incest, which counts the court merged into the statutory rape count at sentencing.

2.   Wilson v. State, 211 Ga.App. 457, 458(1), 439 S.E.2d 685 (1993).

3.   See Wiley v. State, 245 Ga.App. 580, 581-582(2), 538 S.E.2d 483 (2000) (2000) (court may find that state met its burden of showing voluntariness of confession where officer testifies Miranda rights were given and no coercion or threats made);  Trejo v. State, 245 Ga.App. 316, 317(1), 537 S.E.2d 755 (2000) (burden is preponderance of the evidence).

4.   Trejo, supra, 245 Ga.App. at 318(2), 537 S.E.2d 755;  accord Reece v. State, 241 Ga.App. 809, 810, 527 S.E.2d 642 (2000);  cf.   OCGA §§ 16-6-3(a) (“no conviction shall be had for this offense on the unsupported testimony of the victim”);  24-3-53 (confession must be corroborated to justify a conviction).

MILLER, Judge.

ANDREWS, P.J., and ELDRIDGE, J., concur.

Copied to clipboard