McCulley v. State
2017 Ark. App. 313
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Troy McCulley was convicted by a jury of rape (30-year sentence) and multiple drug-paraphernalia offenses; convictions were affirmed on direct appeal.
- He filed a timely Rule 37.1 petition alleging numerous ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims; the circuit court held a hearing, denied relief, and McCulley appealed pro se.
- Central trial evidence: victim A.R.’s testimony that she was drugged, bound, and raped in an outbuilding; Collette (girlfriend) admitted participation and corroborated details; police executed a search warrant on McCulley’s residence and seized pornographic tapes, sex toys, handcuffs, and drug paraphernalia; A.R. tested positive for amphetamines.
- McCulley’s ineffective-assistance claims focused on counsel’s failure to suppress evidence based on an alleged warrant time discrepancy, failure to object to allegedly irrelevant or prejudicial photos/items and pornographic-video titles, and failure to exclude an unconfirmed drug-screen report and testimony about A.R.’s incapacity.
- The circuit court found counsel’s omissions would have been meritless or nonprejudicial under Strickland v. Washington and denied relief; the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (McCulley) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of search warrant (time discrepancy on affidavit/warrant) | Warrant invalid because affidavit/time were signed before affidavit presented; all search evidence should be suppressed | Affiant testified he swore before the judge the same day; minor time/date misprision does not invalidate a warrant when affidavit and testimony establish probable cause | Court: Warrant valid; counsel not ineffective for failing to make meritless suppression motion |
| Relevance/admissibility of photographs and seized items | Photos/items were outside scope of warrant and irrelevant/prejudicial; counsel failed to object | Photographs and items corroborated victim/Collette testimony about the outbuilding and assault; relevant evidence | Court: Evidence relevant; omission of objection not ineffective |
| Admission of drug-screen report (presumptive medical test) | Report inadmissible because medical purpose and not confirmed by forensic lab | Medical records/business-records exception admissible; alleged deficiencies go to weight, not admissibility; exclusion would not create reasonable probability of different outcome | Court: Admission proper or harmless; no prejudice shown; counsel not ineffective |
| Testimony and labels (witnesses’ observations of incapacity; "sex room" and video titles) | Testimony about incapacity was hearsay/opinion; "sex room" label and video titles were prejudicial; counsel failed to object | Testimony was based on personal observations and admissible under Rules 602/701; "sex room" and titles were accurate and corroborative; even if error, evidence of guilt was overwhelming | Court: Testimony and descriptions admissible/relevant; no deficient or prejudicial failure to object; claims denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (established two-prong ineffective-assistance standard)
- Nance v. State, 323 Ark. 583 (1996) (time/date misprision in affidavit/warrant does not invalidate warrant when affiant testifies under oath)
- Breeden v. State, 432 S.W.3d 618 (Ark. 2014) (failure to make meritless objection/motion is not ineffective assistance)
- Watson v. State, 826 S.W.2d 281 (Ark. 1992) (evidence corroborating rape victim is relevant and admissible)
- Isbell v. State, 931 S.W.2d 74 (Ark. 1996) (deficiencies in medical/drug-test results affect weight, not admissibility)