11 results for 'cat:"Sex Offender" AND cat:"Due Process" AND cat:"Child Victims"'.
J. Miller finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of aggravated child molestation and child molestation. Sufficient evidence was presented to support defendant's convictions, including defendant's own admission to his wife that he had sex with one victim. The trial court correctly denied defendant's motion for a new trial. Defendant failed to vigorously assert his right to appeal and cannot show that he was prejudiced by the 20-year delay between his convictions and the resolution of his motion for a new trial. Three pro se filings made by defendant between 2005 and 2009 did not specifically claim that his due process rights were violated by the delay. Defendant did not first assert a due process violation until 2022. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Miller, Filed On: April 9, 2024, Case #: A24A0344, Categories: sex Offender, due Process, child Victims
J. Musseman finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for lewd and indecent acts with a child. Defendant alleges insufficient representation for counsel's alleged failure to move to quash for the state's not putting on evidence at the preliminary hearing of the required element the victim was under the age of 16. Necessary evidence was presented at trial, and defendant fails to show defense counsel's failure to seek a motion to quash at the preliminary hearing impacted the outcome. Affirmed.
Court: Oklahoma Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Musseman , Filed On: March 21, 2024, Case #: F-2022-367, Categories: sex Offender, due Process, child Victims
J. Murphy finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for four counts of first-degree sexual assault, amended from the original charge of rape. Defendant's ex-wife's minor daughter asserted he raped her multiple times between the ages of 14 and 17. Sufficient evidence supports the conviction. Though defendant moved to strike the amended information or for a continuance, saying the information was filed giving him inadequate notice, the amendment was made after defendant divorced the mother and moved out of the residence, changing the nature of the relationship. This was known to the defense since the pendency of the case, and the court properly denied the motion. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Murphy , Filed On: March 13, 2024, Case #: CR-23-131, Categories: sex Offender, due Process, child Victims
J. Moore finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for first-degree sexual assault of a child. Defendant's stepdaughter, his wife's niece and his own biological niece alleged he improperly touched and exposed himself to them, eventually leading to acts of digital penetration and oral sex. Forensic interviews and other evidence support the convictions. The charges were properly joined due to relatedness and occurrence over a period of time. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Moore , Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: A-23-138, Categories: sex Offender, due Process, child Victims
[Consolidated] J. Wright finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for sexual assault of a child and continuous sexual abuse of a young child. Officers investigated defendant after receiving an anonymous report he was living with two underage girls. Police discovered he had been engaged in sexual a relationship with a14-year-old, and with a 16-year-old who was pregnant with his child. Defendant represented himself at trial and claimed the girls lied about their ages. The victims did not testify at trial and defendant had no right to confrontation. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Wright , Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 09-23-00117-CR, Categories: sex Offender, due Process, child Victims
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. Webb finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for two counts of rape, sentencing him to life in prison. Defendant was convicted for raping his granddaughters repeatedly between 1993 and 2003, when the girls were under the ages of 14, and claims the conviction is barred by the statute of limitations. The crimes were reported well after their commission. Charges would be time-barred only if the crimes had been reported before the General Assembly amended the relevant section of law extending the period of limitations. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Webb , Filed On: January 18, 2024, Case #: CR-23-265, Categories: sex Offender, due Process, child Victims
J. Harrison finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for the sexual assault of his minor daughter and her minor friend. All evidence and testimony involving defendant's ongoing "grooming" of the children support the conviction. Though trial counsel has filed a no-merit brief and requested to withdraw, his brief did not address the adverse ruling that, before sentencing but after the finding of guilt, defendant was not allowed to see his children. Rebriefing is ordered and counsel's motion to withdraw is denied.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Harrison , Filed On: January 17, 2024, Case #: CR-23-119, Categories: sex Offender, due Process, child Victims
J. Osowik finds the deletion of the contents of one of the victim's phones did not violate defendant's due process rights. He failed to explain how any of the data could have been used as exculpatory evidence, especially considering the only piece of data known to be on the device was a confession that would have hindered defendant's case. Meanwhile, the use of various insults during closing arguments by the prosecution, including calling defendant a maniac, sexual predator and monster, did not constitute prosecutorial misconduct. They were used sparingly throughout the hour-long remarks, while there was also abundant evidence of defendant's guilt, including victim testimony, DNA samples and text messages. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Osowik, Filed On: December 22, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-4683, Categories: sex Offender, due Process, child Victims
J. D'Auria finds defendant's due process rights were not violated by the trial court's decision to allow testimony from his daughter about prior sexual conduct that never resulted in a criminal indictment. The testimony was properly disclosed to defendant and his attorneys and was properly used as propensity evidence during his trial on sexual assault charges. Additionally, even though a large period of time had passed between the conduct involving his daughter and the current victims, defendant was incarcerated for a significant portion of that time, which allowed the court to admit the evidence, especially considering the similarities between the incidents. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court, Judge: D'Auria, Filed On: November 27, 2023, Case #: SC20740, Categories: sex Offender, due Process, child Victims
J. Graves finds the district court improperly revoked defendant's supervised release. Although defendant's criminal mischief charge was dismissed, revocation was pursued, which denied him his right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses without good cause. Reversed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Graves , Filed On: November 17, 2023, Case #: 23-20381, Categories: sex Offender, due Process, child Victims
J. Harrison finds the trial court properly convicted defendant of sexual assault of his minor daughter. Defendant says the court improperly denied his motions for mistrial arising from reference to defendant’s illegal immigration status after the court had barred such inquiry. The defense had elicited testimony of defendant’s truthful nature from a former employer, which was countered by the prosecutor’s evoking of the immigration status. The court ordered the prosecutor to ask no more questions on the subject and the defense did not ask for a jury admonition. Defendant suffered no prejudice and the sentence of 12 months of probation shows this. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Harrison, Filed On: May 31, 2023, Case #: CR-22-341, Categories: sex Offender, due Process, child Victims