Campbell v. State
484 S.W.3d 279
Ark. Ct. App.2016Background
- Appellant Donald Corey Campbell was convicted in Hot Spring County Circuit Court of raping S.B., a child under fourteen, and sentenced to 40 years in the Arkansas Department of Correction.
- S.B., a guest in Campbell’s home on December 6, 2012, awakened her mother alleging Campbell kissed and touched her genitals and possibly penetrated her; medical exam showed mild irritation consistent with possible sexual abuse.
- Campbell moved in limine to prohibit the State from referring to S.B. as a "victim;" the court denied the motion, allowing argument to the jury and further objection if context warranted; Campbell did not renew objections at trial.
- The State introduced evidence of prior uncharged acts involving Campbell and his step-granddaughter C.D.1 (incidents in 2009 and multiple incidents in 2012), including similar allegations of kissing and touching, and placing his hand in her underwear.
- The trial court admitted the prior-act evidence under Ark. R. Evid. 404(b), finding the evidence probative of opportunity, intent, and plan; the Court of Appeals upheld admission under the "pedophile exception," finding intimate-relationship and substantial similarity requirements satisfied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Use of the term "victim" at trial | State used the term legitimately in presentation | Campbell argued the term prejudicially implied guilt and should be barred | Court rejected error; trial court afforded remedy and Campbell failed to preserve/press further objection; no improper "implanting" shown |
| Admission of prior bad-act evidence under Ark. R. Evid. 404(b) | State: evidence admissible to show intent, plan, opportunity, familiarity, corroboration under pedophile exception | Campbell: evidence only showed propensity; insufficient unique method/plan; jury had no intent/mistake issue so prejudicial | Court affirmed admission; pedophile exception applies—intimate relationship and strong similarity satisfied; no abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Barker v. State, 373 S.W.3d 865 (Ark. 2010) (appellant must cite persuasive authority; issues unsupported by authority may not be considered)
- Vance v. State, 383 S.W.3d 325 (Ark. 2011) (404(b) evidence not admissible merely to show prior bad acts)
- Kelley v. State, 327 S.W.3d 373 (Ark. 2009) (evidence of similar acts with same or other children may show proclivity when helpful)
- Jeffries v. State, 434 S.W.3d 889 (Ark. 2014) (pedophile-exception rationale: proof of depraved sexual instinct and corroboration)
- Eubanks v. State, 303 S.W.3d 450 (Ark. 2009) (sufficient degree of similarity required for 404(b) admission)
- Chunestudy v. State, 408 S.W.3d 55 (Ark. 2012) (intimate-relationship requirement for pedophile exception)
- Free v. State, 732 S.W.2d 452 (Ark. 1987) (prior acts admissible to show familiarity, disposition, and to corroborate victim)
- Rounsaville v. State, 346 S.W.3d 289 (Ark. 2009) (circuit court has broad discretion on evidentiary rulings)
- Chatmon v. State, 467 S.W.3d 731 (Ark. 2015) (abuse-of-discretion standard defined)