Pate v. State
315 Ga. App. 205
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- In December 2008, the victim M.R. reported that in late December 2006 or early January 2007 Brandon Pate entered her bedroom, produced a knife, demanded sexual intercourse, and threatened to injure her father if she refused.
- Kaila testified she witnessed the knife and the sexual encounter, corroborating M.R.’s account.
- Dylan Toves and Officer T.D. Roach testified about M.R.’s outcry and investigation; M.K. testified to a similar 2007 incident where Pate forced sex and threatened to kill her father (no weapon reported).
- The jury convicted Pate of statutory rape, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and possession of a knife during the commission of the felony, but acquitted him of rape, multiple related counts, and other offenses.
- Pate moved for a new trial; the trial court granted the motion to dismiss, and this appeal followed, with the State seeking affirmed judgment on the conviction and the defense challenging several evidentiary rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of prior consistent statements (hearsay) | Pate contends the statements to Toves and Roach were inadmissible hearsay that bolstered M.R.’s testimony. | State maintains those statements were admissible as prior consistent statements where appropriate under the rule. | Harmless error; acquittals on other charges show the error did not affect the verdict. |
| Removal of juror for cause | Pate argues the juror was improperly replaced without sufficient cause. | State asserts the court acted within its discretion based on the juror’s unease and connections. | Within the trial court’s discretion; no reversible error. |
| Admission of bad character evidence | Pate contends the questioning and rebuttal testified to bad character not admissible. | State argues the evidence related to credibility and impeachment, and some details were proper rebuttal. | No abuse of discretion; evidence relevant for impeachment and credibility was admissible. |
| Cross-examining M.R. about juvenile narcotics case (Sixth Amendment) | Pate sought to impeach M.R. with open juvenile case information. | State argues juvenile records lack probative value and are not admissible; cross-exam limited. | Trial court did not abuse discretion; impermissible to pursue speculative credibility attack. |
| Partial courtroom closure during testimony | Pate contends the closure violated his right to a public trial. | State relies on statute allowing closure when minors testify in sex-offense cases. | Not a Sixth Amendment violation; partial closure within permissible scope. |
| Harassment testimony admissibility | Pate argues harassment evidence was hearsay and prejudicial. | State contends harassment testimony was cumulative and probative for credibility. | Admissible; not reversible as cumulative and relevant authority supported credibility determinations. |
Key Cases Cited
- Duggan v. State, 285 Ga. 363 (Ga. 2009) (prior consistent statements and credibility considerations; admissibility discussed)
- Sterling v. State, 267 Ga. 209 (Ga. 1996) (general evidentiary standards and credibility review)
- Mims v. State, 314 Ga.App. 170 (Ga. App. 2012) (harmless error in evidentiary rulings when other evidence supports the conviction)
- Belmar v. State, 279 Ga. 795 (Ga. 2005) (harmlessness of hearsay when cumulative of admissible evidence)
- Jackson v. State, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence (Jackson v. Virginia))
- Sapp v. State, 263 Ga.App. 122 (Ga. App. 2003) (impeachment and limitations on character evidence)
- Moon v. State, 202 Ga.App. 500 (Ga. App. 1992) (bad character evidence and probative value)
- Lee v. State, 308 Ga.App. 711 (Ga. App. 2011) (gun-related evidence and harmless error analysis)