James C. Graham v. State of Mississippi, 264 So. 3d 819

Victim "Betty," age 13, told her school bus driver that her father, James C. Graham, sexually abused her the prior night: entered bathroom while she showered and later forced oral sex in her bedroom.
Graham was charged with sexual battery and gratification of lust; at trial he denied entering Betty’s bedroom; he and his wife testified he left the bedroom only twice that night and that they had stayed up all night using drugs.
Jury acquitted Graham of sexual battery but convicted him of gratification of lust; he was sentenced to 15 years without parole.
On appeal Graham raised two claims: (1) trial court erred by admitting four out-of-court statements by Betty without a tender-years hearing under M.R.E. 803(25); and (2) ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to hearsay and eliciting testimony about a purported prior rape arrest.
Trial counsel did not object to the hearsay statements and used inconsistencies among them to challenge Betty’s credibility; no motion in limine was filed to exclude those statements.
The Court of Appeals reviewed admissibility for abuse of discretion, addressed preservation and plain-error principles, and noted ineffective-assistance claims are generally for post-conviction proceedings.

Issue	Graham's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Admission of child's out-of-court statements without a tender-years hearing	Trial court was required to hold a tender-years hearing and find substantial indicia of reliability before admitting Betty’s statements under the tender-years exception	No contemporaneous objection was made at trial; absent objection the court was not required to hold a hearing and counsel may have had strategic reasons not to object	No error. Issue unpreserved; no plain error found; tender-years hearing not required without timely objection
Ineffective assistance of counsel	Counsel was ineffective for not objecting to hearsay and for eliciting testimony about an alleged prior rape arrest	Choices about objections and impeachment were trial strategy; ineffective-assistance claims are better raised in post-conviction relief where the record can be developed	Denied on direct appeal without prejudice to pursue post-conviction relief

White v. State, 48 So. 3d 454 (Miss. 2010) (standard of review for hearsay admission is abuse of discretion)
Lynch v. State, 877 So. 2d 1254 (Miss. 2004) (reversible error requires abuse of discretion that affected a substantial right and preservation by objection)
Nunnery v. State, 126 So. 3d 105 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (discussed tender-years hearing error in that case)
Smith v. State, 530 So. 2d 155 (Miss. 1988) (contemporaneous objection rule for preserving evidentiary issues)
Clayton v. State, 893 So. 2d 246 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004) (movant must obtain a ruling to preserve motions for appeal)
Keithly v. State, 111 So. 3d 1202 (Miss. 2013) (plain-error standard requires a clear legal rule deviation that prejudiced the outcome)
Shaheed v. State, 205 So. 3d 1105 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016) (no plain error where hearsay admitted without objection; counsel’s strategic choice not to object is permissible)
Pinter v. State, 221 So. 3d 378 (Miss. Ct. App. 2017) (ineffective-assistance claims generally raised in post-conviction relief)
Carr v. State, 873 So. 2d 991 (Miss. 2004) (strategic decisions by counsel about motions, witnesses, and objections fall within trial strategy and typically do not support ineffective-assistance claims)
Cole v. State, 666 So. 2d 767 (Miss. 1995) (same principle regarding trial strategy and ineffective-assistance claims)