Dennis Eugene Allen v. State
2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 6465
| Tex. App. | 2014Background
- Defendant Dennis Eugene Allen was convicted by a jury of aggravated sexual assault of his minor daughter (charged act: digital penetration on or about Oct. 8, 2008) and sentenced to 15 years after pleading true to an enhancement.
- Victim K.A., age 12 at trial, testified to multiple incidents of abuse beginning in second grade, including the charged incident at an apartment in Bogota; she made an outcry to her aunt on May 20, 2012 and later underwent a forensic interview at a Children’s Advocacy Center (CAC).
- Rebecca Peavy, CAC Executive Director, conducted the forensic interview and testified about statements K.A. made there; Cathy Williams (aunt) authored an affidavit memorializing K.A.’s initial outcry.
- Medical exam by Dr. Matthew Cox found no physical trauma; Dr. Cox explained physical signs of abuse often are absent or healed by exam time.
- Allen testified denying the assaults and disputing residence/timing facts; the jury credited K.A. and convicted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to support conviction | State: K.A.’s trial testimony (supported by Peavy’s CAC report) proved elements of aggravated sexual assault beyond a reasonable doubt | Allen: inconsistencies in K.A.’s account, lack of physical evidence, and testimony from wife undermine sufficiency | Affirmed — viewing evidence in light most favorable to verdict, K.A.’s testimony alone was sufficient to support conviction |
| Proper outcry witness under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 38.072 | State: Peavy (CAC interviewer) was the first adult to whom K.A. described the Bogota/apartment incidents and thus is the proper outcry witness | Allen: K.A.’s aunt (Williams) made the first outcry; statements to Williams were the outcry and Peavy shouldn’t qualify | Affirmed — trial court did not abuse discretion; Williams’ outcry covered other locations/events, Peavy’s interview covered the Bogota incident charged here |
| Allowing Peavy to remain in courtroom (sequestration rule) | State: error, if any, was harmless given K.A.’s strong trial testimony, prior notice about Peavy’s testimony, and lack of apparent influence on Peavy’s testimony | Allen: allowing Peavy to hear K.A. and other witnesses advantaged the State and risked influencing Peavy’s testimony | Error found but harmless — court concluded Peavy was not influenced in a way that affected substantial rights; verdict stands |
Key Cases Cited
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (framework for legal-sufficiency review in state cases)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for constitutional sufficiency of the evidence)
- Lopez v. State, 343 S.W.3d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (outcry statement must describe the offense more than a general allusion)
- Owens v. State, 381 S.W.3d 696 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2012) (abuse of discretion standard for outcry admission)
- Ladd v. State, 3 S.W.3d 547 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (harmless-error standard for nonconstitutional evidentiary errors)