19 results for 'cat:"Jury" AND cat:"Sex Offender" AND cat:"Child Victims"'.
J. Doyle finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of aggravated child molestation, child molestation and incest. The trial court correctly denied defendant's motion for a new trial. Defendant's trial counsel was not deficient for failing to strike from the jury a juror employed as a corrections officer in the jail where defendant was held after his arrest. The juror had no arrest powers and no personal knowledge of defendant being an inmate when he served on the jury. Defendant failed to present evidence showing that the juror could not be impartial. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Doyle, Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: A24A0217, Categories: jury, sex Offender, child Victims
J. Barrett finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for sexual assault. The victim testified to experiencing multiple sexual assaults by defendant, her mother's boyfriend, occurring over a period of years between the ages of 3 and 14. Notably, though she had not seen defendant's penis, she knew what it was when he forced it into her mouth in a dark room. Defendant was apprised of the charges, and the jury was correctly not instructed on limiting certain conduct to rape and other conduct to sexual assault. Witness credibility is an issue for the jury, and the victim's testimony is sufficient. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Barrett , Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: CR 23-147, Categories: sex Offender, child Victims, jury Instructions
J. McCullough finds the lower court improperly determined that the originating court abused its discretion in declining to provide funds to retain several experts who would assist the defendant in challenging his confession. The defendant admitted to four counts of rape and one count of object sexual penetration of a child under the age of thirteen. The defendant later sought to hire a psychologist to assist him in court on the subject of mental deficits that make a person vulnerable to coercive interrogation tactics. The jury could view the video of the interrogation and evaluate the impact of the police tactics for themselves meaning he did not require an expert on the subject of police interrogation tactics.
Court: Virginia Supreme Court, Judge: McCullough, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: 220382, Categories: jury, sex Offender, child Victims
J. Gibbons finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for attempted sexual assault and incest. Defendant says the court incorrectly accepted his Alford plea being that he did not understand the elements of sexual assault. Defendant did not take his plea until after voir dire, when the victims were ready to testify. The court also based its sentencing decision on the facts of the crimes, indicating the defendant's failure to acknowledge his immorality was used as a sentencing factor. The court did not vindictively sentence defendant because he exercised his right to a jury trial. Affirmed
Court: Nevada Court of Appeals, Judge: Gibbons , Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: 85880-CoA, Categories: jury, sex Offender, child Victims
J. Rovner finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of attempting to persuade a minor to engage in sexual activity. When considered as a whole, the jury instructions accurately summarized the law. Further, even if there were an error, the evidence against defendant was so overwhelming that it did not prejudice his case. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Rovner, Filed On: February 14, 2024, Case #: 23-1542, Categories: sex Offender, child Victims, jury Instructions
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Palafox finds a lower court did not err when it convicted defendant of sexual assault of a child. Defendant appealed based on a jury instruction, which included a “factually impossible date” on which the victim would have no longer been a minor. However, since the jury established that sexual contact did in fact happen while the victim was a minor, this instruction creates “no egregious harm.” Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Palafox, Filed On: February 14, 2024, Case #: 08-23-00197-CR, Categories: sex Offender, child Victims, jury Instructions
J. Mackey finds that the lower court improperly convicted defendant of course of sexual conduct against a child and endangering the welfare of a child for allegedly digitally penetrating an 8-year-old boy's rectum whenever the child shared his bed. A question from the jury was not adequately answered to dispel their confusion over the statutory time element involved. As a result, a new trial is warranted. Reversed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Mackey, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 113425, Categories: jury, sex Offender, child Victims
J. Kamins finds the trial court plainly erred in failing to instruct on the mental state for the element of sexual contact but declines to correct the error. The guilty verdicts, which indicate that the jury believed the touching had occurred make it "unlikely that the jury did not also find that defendant knowingly subjected the victim to sexual contact.” Affirmed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Kamins, Filed On: January 24, 2024, Case #: A178211, Categories: sex Offender, child Victims, jury Instructions
J. Aoyagi finds trial court properly declined to declare a mistrial after a witness vouched for the complainant that contributed to defendant’s conviction for two counts of first-degree sodomy. “The court took appropriate corrective action to address the situation, including striking the testimony, giving a detailed curative instruction, and giving a final instruction that reiterated the jury’s singular responsibility for making credibility determinations.” Affirmed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Aoyagi, Filed On: December 28, 2023, Case #: A176792, Categories: sex Offender, child Victims, jury Instructions
J. Navarro finds the trial court was not required to include a jury instruction regarding defendant's culpable mental state in relation to the charge of sexual abuse by a person in a position of trust. A knowing mental state is not required for the position of trust element of the crime. The term "knowingly" appears in an entirely separate clause from the "position of trust" language in the criminal statute, which is intended to protect the child victims, regardless of whether the perpetrator subjectively believes they are in a position of trust. Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Navarro, Filed On: November 2, 2023, Case #: 2023COA102, Categories: sex Offender, child Victims, jury Instructions
J. Murphy finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for three counts of sexual indecency with a child. Defendant's minor cousins have disclosed that he made sexual comments toward them, soliciting intercourse. One of them, out of fear that he would become physical, began secretly recording him. All testimony and evidence were properly admitted. The court told the jury to disregard the beginning of a vague question by the state that did not indicate a crime for which defendant was previously investigated. Any problem was cured by the instruction. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Murphy , Filed On: September 20, 2023, Case #: CR-22-402, Categories: sex Offender, child Victims, jury Instructions
[Consolidated] J. Wright finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for three counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child and one count of indecency with a child, sentencing him to 70 years and 20 years, respectively. When the trial court asked if there were objections to seating the jurors, none were given. Nothing in Arkansas' rules requires that a court specifically request whether there are any challenges for cause, and the complaint regarding jury selection is not preserved. Though defendant argues that the court went into “unnecessary details” regarding the indictment to the jury, he does not specify what statements were unnecessary, nor does he cite to any legal authority as to why they might show bias. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Wright , Filed On: September 13, 2023, Case #: 09-22-00121-CR, Categories: jury, sex Offender, child Victims
J. Markle finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of aggravated child molestation and child molestation. The trial court's jury instructions sufficiently covered a charge requested by defendant on witness credibility related to the victim's delayed outcry. The trial court did not commit any error by charging the jury that time is not an essential element of the offenses. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Markle, Filed On: September 5, 2023, Case #: A23A0971, Categories: sex Offender, child Victims, jury Instructions
J. Forst finds the trial court properly convicted and sentenced defendant for two counts of sexual battery. On more than one occasion the child victim complained of pain in her genitals before the grandmother obtained a medical examination which revealed injuries consistent with sexual battery. The court properly granted the state’s request to introduce child hearsay statements with respect to the mother, grandmother and medical examiner as witnesses, making extensive findings on the reliability of the victim’s hearsay statements as statutorily required. Defendant did not preserve his constitutional claims regarding the six-person jury, which also fails on its merits. Expert testimony was also properly allowed. Affirmed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Forst, Filed On: August 30, 2023, Case #: 4D22-1347, Categories: jury, sex Offender, child Victims
J. Mullins finds the trial court properly precluded defendant's attorney from questioning prospective jurors abouts parents who display affection for their children by kissing them on the lips. Defense counsel was still able to ask general questions about displays of affection and chose not to question more than half the jurors about such interactions, while the state did not focus its case on defendant's propensity to kiss his daughters on the lips. Meanwhile, the trial court properly admitted the video interview of the victim, which provided details not contained in her trial testimony and was crucial to the state's case regarding defendant's sexual assault charges. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court, Judge: Mullins, Filed On: August 28, 2023, Case #: SC20693, Categories: jury, sex Offender, child Victims
J. Musseman finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant for multiple counts of child sexual abuse. The record shows that each child was under the domination of defendant when he committed the acts. The state chose to charge him with only one count of abuse for each child, and the jury was properly instructed, without objection, according to the uniform jury instruction based upon the child sexual abuse statute. Affirmed.
Court: Oklahoma Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Musseman, Filed On: July 27, 2023, Case #: F-22021-431, Categories: sex Offender, child Victims, jury Instructions
J. Suttell affirms the trial court’s denial of a restaurateur’s request for a new trial after a jury convicted him of sexual assault with a knife against a waitress employed at his restaurant. The defendant argued that the trial justice committed an error of law when he permitted state prosecutors to introduce evidence that the waitress was molested as a child to explain the woman’s delay in reporting her boss’s attacks to the police. The defendant’s contention that her testimony about her childhood was irrelevant because it failed to connect the earlier incident to the later alleged assault has no merit. Affirmed.
Court: Rhode Island Supreme Court, Judge: Suttell, Filed On: June 26, 2023, Case #: 2021-71, Categories: sex Offender, child Victims, jury Instructions
J. Powell finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of sodomy, incent, and child molestation. Although multiple acts of abuse were introduced at trial, the nature of the evidence minimized any risk that the jury did not substantially agree to the same acts described in the jury instructions to support the verdicts. Affirmed.
Court: Missouri Supreme Court, Judge: Powell, Filed On: June 13, 2023, Case #: SC99554, Categories: sex Offender, child Victims, jury Instructions