From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 27, 1988
374 S.E.2d 565 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988)

Opinion

77266.

DECIDED OCTOBER 27, 1988.

Child molestation. Cobb Superior Court. Before Judge Hines.

Wallace C. Clayton, for appellant.

Thomas J. Charron, District Attorney, Fonda Clay, Debra Bernes, Nancy Jordan, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellee.


Appellant Harris was convicted of child molestation and sentenced to ten years' confinement and ten years' probation. After denial of his motion for new trial, he appealed to this court, enumerating as error the general grounds; the trial court's instructing the jury that in a child molestation case the uncorroborated testimony of the victim is alone sufficient to sustain a conviction; and the trial court's granting of the State's motion in limine that the defense not be permitted to introduce evidence that the child had access to, and sometimes watched, the Playboy Channel on television. Held:

1. We find the enumeration of the general grounds to be without merit. Examination of the trial transcript, together with the remainder of the record, reveals more than sufficient evidence to authorize the rational trier of fact to find appellant guilty as charged beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560) (1979). We note in particular that the court below expressly ruled the six-year-old victim competent to testify, and that her detailed but uncorroborated testimony was sufficient alone to sustain the conviction. OCGA § 16-6-4; Padgett v. State, 175 Ga. App. 818 ( 334 S.E.2d 883) (1985). It is the prerogative of the court to determine the competency of a witness. OCGA § 24-9-7; Smallwood v. State, 165 Ga. App. 473 ( 301 S.E.2d 670) (1983). We find no error of law or insufficiency of evidence in the proceedings below.

2. In view of our holding in Division 1, supra, we find the challenged jury instruction to be a correct statement of relevant law. Padgett v. State, supra. This enumeration, too, is without merit.

3. The State's motion in limine was properly granted, and the proffered evidence properly excluded, because it was legally irrelevant. "The past sexual experience of a child in a case such as this is irrelevant to the issue of whether molestation was committed by the defendant on trial. [Cit.]" Chastain v. State, 180 Ga. App. 312 ( 349 S.E.2d 6) (1986). "In a child molestation case evidence as to the victim's reputation for nonchastity is not admissible. [Cit.] Nor may evidence be admitted to discredit the victim by showing her preoccupation with sex. [Cits.]" Vargas v. State, 184 Ga. App. 650 ( 362 S.E.2d 461) (1987); accord Woods v. State, 187 Ga. App. 105 ( 369 S.E.2d 353) (1988).

Furthermore, even if arguendo the exclusion of the evidence were error, it was harmless because it was cumulative of other evidence admitted at trial. As the transcript clearly reveals, competent evidence was adduced showing that the Playboy Channel was available in the victim's home and that there existed a distinct possibility that the child might have watched (and presumably received sexual information or stimulation from) that channel when no adults were aware of what she was doing. In light of this evidence appellant could not have been harmed by the court's exclusion of what would have been redundant evidence. In order to warrant reversal of the judgment, an error must be harmful. Dill v. State, 222 Ga. 793 ( 152 S.E.2d 741) (1966). Moreover, in view of the other evidence brought out at trial, we find it highly probable that the alleged error did not contribute to the conviction. Johnson v. State, 238 Ga. 59, 61 ( 230 S.E.2d 869) (1976). This enumeration is devoid of merit.

Judgment affirmed. Sognier, J., concurs. Carley, J., concurs in the judgment only.

DECIDED OCTOBER 27, 1988.


Summaries of

Harris v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 27, 1988
374 S.E.2d 565 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988)
Case details for

Harris v. State

Case Details

Full title:HARRIS v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Oct 27, 1988

Citations

374 S.E.2d 565 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988)
374 S.E.2d 565

Citing Cases

Pye v. State

Strozier, supra at 437(2), 724 S.E.2d 446 (punctuation and footnote omitted).Coleman, supra at 411(1), 731…

Mency v. State

According to Mency, "there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury applied a standard of proof less…