Jones v. the State
340 Ga. App. 568
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- In December 2012 a jury convicted Schleiermacher Jones of the 2003 rape and child molestation of his 10‑year‑old cousin A.M.; he was acquitted of several other charges. The trial court denied his motion for new trial and this appeal followed.
- A.M. testified she awoke to Jones rubbing her vagina and on a later night to Jones penetrating her while she was asleep; she reported bleeding the next day and told relatives. No police/medical report was made in 2003; she made further outcry statements in 2007 (journal) and 2009 (to a cousin).
- At trial four witnesses testified about A.M.’s earlier consistent statements; Jones objected to two of those witnesses and failed to preserve objections as to two others.
- Jones’s counsel sought to cross‑examine A.M. about alleged sexual activity by A.M.’s sister K.R. to suggest a motive to fabricate; the prosecutor’s objections were sustained under Georgia’s then‑existing rape shield statute.
- Jones requested a jury charge about delay in reporting as a factor in credibility; the trial court refused the specific requested language but instructed generally on credibility.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence / denial of new trial | Jones: evidence insufficient; verdict against weight of evidence | State: testimony, journal, and outcry statements provided competent evidence supporting convictions | Affirmed — viewed favorably to State, evidence sufficient and refusal of new trial proper |
| Admission of outcry/prior consistent statements | Jones: outcry witnesses improperly bolstered hearsay testimony | State: two objections not preserved; other two admissible as prior consistent statements after defense challenged witness veracity | Affirmed — two objections forfeited; remaining testimony admissible under prior‑consistent‑statement exception |
| Exclusion of cross‑examination about sister K.R.’s sexual history | Jones: excluded evidence relevant to motive to fabricate and confrontation/constitutional rights | State: evidence barred by former Georgia rape‑shield statute and not within statutory exceptions | Affirmed — rape‑shield statute properly applied; exclusion not an abuse of discretion |
| Refusal to give requested jury charge on delay in reporting | Jones: trial court should have given specific charge about delay affecting credibility | State: trial court properly charged on credibility generally; specific language unnecessary | Affirmed — no plain error where general credibility instructions given and defense could argue delay to jury |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency review)
- Miller v. State, 273 Ga. 831 (existence of some competent evidence supports verdict)
- Cowart v. State, 294 Ga. 333 (prior consistent statements admissible when veracity placed in issue)
- Jeffers v. State, 290 Ga. 311 (preservation rule for objections to evidence)
- Haynes v. State, 326 Ga. App. 336 (minimal force required to prove child rape)