Carle v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-KA-00699-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-20-2004 Opinion Author: Thomas, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Sexual battery, Statutory rape & Touching child for lustful purposes - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 03-08-2002 Appealed from: Harrison County Circuit Court Judge: Robert H. Walker Disposition: CONVICTED OF EIGHT COUNTS OF SEXUAL BATTERY AND SENTENCED TO THIRTY YEARS ON EACH COUNT, ONE COUNT OF STATUTORY RAPE AND SENTENCE OF THIRTY YEARS, AND THREE COUNTS OF TOUCHING A CHILD FOR LUSTFUL PURPOSES AND SENTENCE OF FIFTEEN YEARS ON EACH COUNT, ALL SENTENCES TO RUN CONSECUTIVELY FOR A TOTAL OF THREE HUNDRED FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. District Attorney: Cono A. Caranna, II Case Number: B-2401-00-335 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Robert Clark Carle, Sr. |
LISA D. COLLUMS
FRANK PHILIP WITTMANN |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: SCOTT STUART |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Sexual battery, Statutory rape & Touching child for lustful purposes - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Robert Carle, Sr. was convicted of eight counts of sexual battery, one count of statutory rape, and three counts of touching a child for lustful purposes. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Ineffective assistance of counsel Carle argues that his counsel was ineffective, because he failed to obtain and present at trial any evidence that was relevant to whether the rape and sexual battery actually occurred, failed to obtain any additional psychological testing regarding his mental state, failed to ask follow up questions of jurors during voir dire, failed to note the race of the jurors on the jury list for the record, and failed to limit the evidence introduced by the State against Carle. To prove his claim, he must show his attorney’s conduct was deficient and prejudicial. Carle fails to mention what the missing evidence would have been or who the witnesses would have been that would have testified in his support. He also presents no evidence supporting a finding that his attorney had an obligation to request additional psychological testing or that he acted deficiently in not asking follow up questions of potential jurors. Carle also argues that his counsel was deficient in not objecting to testimony that he provided marijuana and alcohol to the minors at his apartment which would be inadmissible as other crimes. In comparison to the charges against Carle, providing alcohol and marijuana paled in comparison, and the failure to object to its admission does not rise to the level of prejudice required. Issue 2: Sufficiency of evidence Carle argues that the weight and credibility of the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict, because the one of the victim’s testimony contained inconsistencies and there was testimony that the victim had a propensity to lie. The uncorroborated testimony of a victim is sufficient to support a guilty verdict where that testimony is not discredited or contradicted by other evidence. Here, there is sufficient evidence for a reasonable and fair minded juror to find Carle guilty of the crimes with which he was charged. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
