Anderson v. State, 2011 Miss. LEXIS 194

Anderson was convicted by a jury of two counts of statutory rape and one count of sexual battery, with life sentences for the rape counts and a 30-year term for sexual battery, all to run concurrently.
The victim, Allison, testified via closed-circuit to describe repeated abuse beginning when she was around seven years old, including incidents on November 25, 2006 and December 2, 2006.
Corroborating witnesses included the victim’s aunt Deborah Blevin, mother Rachel Abbot, and Dr. Donald Matherne; the defense did not present an alibi.
A pretrial motion to quash Count I was denied; defense later challenged the sufficiency and clarity of the indictments.
Anderson raised multiple trial-court errors on appeal, which the Mississippi Supreme Court addressed collectively, affirming the convictions and sentences.
The trial record included a Daubert-type analysis for Dr. Matherne’s testimony, with the court admitting his “fist-demonstration” technique as part of the testimony.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal	Anderson claims counsel failed to seek mental-competency evaluation and to preserve his rights at pretrial	Anderson argues trial counsel waived key rights and failed to test insanity/competency	Issue reserved for post-conviction relief; record insufficient for direct review
Admission of tender-years hearsay	Hearsay statements by Allison should be excluded absent reliability	Trial court properly admitted statements under Rule 803(25)	Admission upheld; substantial indicia of reliability supported by trial court findings
Indictment clarity for Counts I and II	Indictment for Counts I and II was indistinguishable and violated notice/double-jeopardy protections	Rule 7.06 allows date variances; the counts were distinguishable	Indictment flawed; majority declined to quash Count I but identified double-jeopardy concerns (not reversed on the counts in the decision)
Admission of Dr. Matherne’s testimony under Rule 702/Daubert	Fist-demonstration is scientific reliability to aid the fact-finder	Technique unreliable/unduly suggestive; Daubert factors not met	Court did not abuse discretion; testimony admitted though majority recognized concerns with reliability
Sufficiency of evidence to support Counts I and II	Uncorroborated testimony sufficient where not discredited	Credibility questions for jury; defense challenged timing details	Evidence sufficient; rational juror could convict on both counts

Veasley v. State, 735 So.2d 432 (Miss. 1999) (tender-years presumption in sexual-abuse cases)
Eakes v. State, 665 So.2d 852 (Miss. 1995) (indictments may omit exact dates if defendant is advised of charges)
McLemore v. State, 863 So.2d 31 (Miss. 2003) (adopted modified Daubert standard for Rule 702; factors for reliability)
Davis v. State, 878 So.2d 1020 (Miss.Ct. App. 2004) (forensic interview technique not automatically inadmissible)
Poole v. Avara, 908 So.2d 716 (Miss. 2005) (Daubert framework applies to expert testimony; non-exhaustive factors)