Little v. State
| Docket Number: | 2010-KA-00739-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-18-2011 Opinion Author: Irving, P.J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Child molestation - Tender-years exception - M.R.E. 803(25) Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Griffis, P.J., Myers, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton, Maxwell and Russell, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 04-08-2010 Appealed from: Warren County Circuit Court Judge: Isadore Patrick Disposition: CONVICTED OF MOLESTATION AND SENTENCED TO FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, WITH TEN YEARS TO SERVE, FIVE YEARS SUSPENDED, AND FIVE YEARS OF POSTRELEASE SUPERVISION Case Number: 08,0172-CRP |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | William Eugene Little |
JUSTIN TAYLOR COOK |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: LADONNA C. HOLLAND |
|
|
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: | Child molestation - Tender-years exception - M.R.E. 803(25) |
| Summary of the Facts: | William Little was convicted of child molestation and was sentenced to fifteen years, with ten years to serve, five years suspended, and five years of post-release supervision. Little appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Little argues that the circuit court erred in admitting hearsay statements made by the victim during the course of a forensic interview. For the tender-years exception found in M.R.E. 803(25) to apply, the child must be of tender years. There is a rebuttable presumption that a child under the age of twelve is of tender years. Once the circuit court determines that a child is of tender years, it must establish the reliability of the child’s statements. Failure to make an on-the-record finding regarding the reliability of hearsay statements admitted under the tender-years exception constitutes error. However, the circuit court is not required to make point-by-point findings on the reliability factors where there is sufficient evidence that the child’s statements possess substantial indicia of reliability. Little argues that because none of the reliability factors were discussed at length, the circuit court’s analysis under the tender-years exception was improper. However, the record belies this contention. The circuit court determined that the victim was eleven years old at the time of the interview and, thus, of tender years. The forensic interviewer testified that she was a licensed social worker and had received forty hours of specialized training in forensic interviewing. She testified that she had performed seventy-four forensic interviews of children prior to her interview of the victim. Additionally, she testified that she had utilized a nationally recognized protocol when conducting the interview that employed non-leading and non-suggestive questions. Finally, she testified that she had no reason to believe, based on her interview of the victim, that the victim had been coached. The circuit court also considered the timing of the victim’s declarations in relation to when the acts of sexual abuse happened and whether the statements were spontaneous. Based on the record, the circuit court made an appropriate on-the-record finding regarding the reliability of the victim’s statements made during the forensic interview and correctly found that her statements were reliable. Furthermore, the victim testified at trial. Consequently, the circuit court did not err in admitting her statements under the tender-years exception. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
