Withers v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2004-KA-00827-SCT

Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 07-21-2005
Opinion Author: Smith, C.J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Statutory rape - Cross-examination - Hearsay - Tender years - M.R.E. 803(25) - Sufficiency of evidence
Judge(s) Concurring: Waller and Cobb, P.JJ., Easley, Carlson, Graves, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ.
Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 04-05-2004
Appealed from: Neshoba County Circuit Court
Judge: Vernon Cotten
Disposition: Convicted of statory rape and sentenced to thirty years.
District Attorney: Mark Sheldon Duncan
Case Number: 03-CR-0091-NS-C

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Christopher R. Withers




DONALD L. KILGORE



 

Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: W. GLENN WATTS  

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: Statutory rape - Cross-examination - Hearsay - Tender years - M.R.E. 803(25) - Sufficiency of evidence

Summary of the Facts: Christopher Withers was convicted of statutory rape and was sentenced to 30 years. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Cross-examination Withers argues that he was prejudiced by the court’s abuse of discretion regarding his cross-examination of the victim, because he was not able to fully cross-examine the victim in order to impeach her credibility as a witness. Withers also argues that he was unduly prejudiced by being deprived the opportunity to show the jury that the victim had a motive to be untruthful and may have been untruthful while testifying. The record clearly shows that Withers was allowed to adequately cross-examine the victim. The judge did not commit a clear error of judgment because he did not prevent Withers from cross-examining the victim, but instead, only limited the extent thereof. Issue 2: Hearsay Withers argues that the judge erred in admitting the hearsay testimony of the victim, because the victim’s statements were not spontaneous and were inconsistent over time. Factors which should be considered in judging reliability of the statements of a child victim under M.R.E. 803(25) include spontaneity, consistency, mental state of the declarant, a lack of motive to fabricate, and use of terminology unexpected of a child of similar age. The record shows that there is substantial, credible evidence to support the judge’s decision to allow the victim’s statements into evidence under the tender years exception. During the competency hearing, when asked if she knew the difference between the truth and a lie, the victim showed that she knew the difference in truth and imagination. The victim was fourteen at the time of trial, and twelve when the sexual intercourse began. Also, the judge found substantial indicia of reliability in the victim’s statements made to five different witnesses, who were all cross-examined by counsel for Withers. Issue 3: Sufficiency of evidence Withers argues that the evidence presented was not sufficient for reasonable jurors to convict him, because none of the evidence presented connected him to the alleged sexual abuse other than the accusations of the victim. The record shows that the victim identified Withers as the person who had raped her. She also testified of a pattern of sexual assault from the time she was some six or seven years old, which included digital penetration, forced oral sex, and eventual vaginal penetration. She also testified that her date of birth was January 28, 1990, and that she was twelve-years-old when she was forcibly raped by Withers. The victim’s mother testified that Chris Withers’ birthday was October 27, 1967, and that the victim told her that he had raped her. All of the other witnesses called by the State testified that the victim told them that she had been subjected to continuing sexual abuse by her stepfather. Accordingly, all of the elements required by section 97-3-65(1)(b) have been satisfied.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court