United States v. Richard Allen De Georgia

Richard Allen De Georgia appeals from a judgment of conviction, entered on a jury verdict, for violating 18 U.S.C. § 2312 (Dyer Act). The offense involved a 1968 Mustang automobile allegedly stolen from the Hertz Corporation, in New York City, and thereafter driven to Tucson, Arizona. The car was recovered from De Georgia on September 9, 1968.

Defendant first contends that his written confession, which was received in evidence, should have been excluded because prior to making that confession he was not properly advised of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 474 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L. Ed.2d 694 .

The facts pertaining to the warning given defendant before he confessed and the voluntariness or involuntariness of his confession were developed at a hearing held in the absence of the jury. Upon the basis of the evidence so received, the trial court found that defendant had been fully advised as to his rights and that the confession was given voluntarily.

Our examination of the record convinces us that defendant was given the full benefit of Miranda , and that the trial court’s finding that the confession was given voluntarily is adequately supported by the…

(concurring).

I concur in the majority opinion, but I reemphasize that the appellant, in objecting to the questioned evidence, did not rely upon the best evidence rule. Had an objection been made on this basis, I would be more troubled by admission of this testimony, since the computer print-out sheets could have been made available as evidence that there was no transaction recorded.

Moreover, I wish to add a few cautionary words of my own. As Judge Hamley points out, the business records exception to the hearsay evidence rule is grounded on the probability of accuracy that is provided by the fact that, in the regular course of business, certain records are maintained and relied upon in daily business operations. The Federal Business Records Act was designed to conform this exception to the practices of modern business by eliminating the traditional requirement that the authenticity of the records be established by the personal testimony of their maker. 1 Eliminating this requirement, however, should in no way alleviate the need for proof that the particular records have a high degree of trustworthiness. Palmer v. Hoffman, 318 U.S. 109 , 63 S.Ct. 477 , 87 L.Ed. 645 (1943).

The…

420 F.2d 889 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Richard Allen DE GEORGIA, Appellant. No. 23835. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. December 11, 1969. Philip Fahringer (argued), Tucson, Ariz., for appellant. JoAnn Diamos (argued), Rubin Salter, Jr., Asst. U. S. Attys., Edward E. Davis, U. S. Atty., Tucson, Ariz., for appellee. Before HAMLEY, BROWNING and ELY, Circuit Judges. HAMLEY, Circuit Judge. 1 Richard Allen De Georgia appeals from a judgment of conviction, entered on a jury verdict, for violating 18 U.S.C. § 2312 (Dyer Act). The offense involved a 1968 Mustang automobile allegedly stolen from the Hertz Corporation, in New York City, and thereafter driven to Tucson, Arizona. The car was recovered from De Georgia on September 9, 1968. 2 Defendant first contends that his written confession, which was received in evidence, should have been excluded because prior to making that confession he was not properly advised of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 474 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L. Ed.2d 694 . 3 The facts pertaining to the warning given defendant before he confessed and the voluntariness or involuntariness of his confession were developed at a…