Georgia v. Abbott
Annotate this CaseIn 2013, a grand jury returned an indictment charging Dijon Cortez Abbott with murder and the related crimes of aggravated assault, possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, unlawful gang activity, criminal damage to property in the second degree, and reckless conduct, all in connection with the fatal shooting of Marques Eubanks and the wounding of two others. The superior court entered an order suppressing the entirety of Abbott’s video-recorded statements with two sheriff deputies, finding Abbott was in custody no later than the time when he was placed in an interrogation room and shackled to the floor, because no reasonable person could believe that he was free to leave under Abbott’s circumstances. Considering all of the circumstances, the superior court not only excluded Abbott’s pre-Miranda statements, it also excluded all of his post-Miranda statements as having resulted from an “interrogate first, warn later” procedure. The State of Georgia appealed the suppression of the recorded statements. In this case, the superior court did not address the existence, credibility, or weight of any such evidence, nor did the court make any findings or draw any conclusion as to whether Langford’s two-step interrogation was a deliberate strategy, used in a calculated way to undermine the Miranda warning. Accordingly, the superior court’s judgment suppressing Abbott’s post-Miranda statements was vacated, and the case remanded so that the superior court could make further findings of fact and apply the correct legal standard.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.