Reyes-Vera v. State
313 Ga. App. 467
Ga. Ct. App.2011Background
- Reyes-Vera, age ~51, was indicted in Dougherty County on two counts of molesting an 11-year-old boy, D.M.
- He waived a jury and proceeded to a bench trial on January 19, 2010; the court acquitted on the first count and convicted on the second.
- D.M. testified that Reyes-Vera attempted to touch him in September 2008 and later engaged in more explicit conduct in November 2008.
- Cousins testified they hid in a closet and observed touching and kissing attempts; Clum (aunt’s boyfriend) corroborated some details.
- Law enforcement and a forensic interviewer corroborated D.M.’s account; Reyes-Vera presented no witnesses and did not testify.
- By statute, the charge required proof of intent to arouse or satisfy sexual desires, which the jury found Reyes-Vera possessed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the intent element | Reyes-Vera argues the evidence failed to prove requisite intent. | Reyes-Vera contends the State failed to establish he intended to arouse or satisfy sexual desires. | Sufficient evidence supported intent; credibility issues reserved for factfinder. |
| Corroboration of victim testimony | D.M.’s testimony alone suffices, per statute. | No need for corroboration, but the defense notes inconsistencies. | Victim corroborated by cousins and others; corroboration not required but present. |
| Weight of witness credibility | Evidence viewed in the light most favorable to support the verdict. | Trial court erred in crediting alleged inconsistencies or denials by Reyes-Vera. | Appellate court does not weigh credibility; finder of fact resolves it. |
| Impact of post-incident statements by Reyes-Vera | Statements by Reyes-Vera to officers supported guilt. | Statements were misinterpreted or inconsistent with guilt. | Conflicts resolved in favor of the trial court’s assessment of credibility. |
| Harmonization of inconsistent trial findings | Conviction on second count aligns with evidence of abuse. | Acquittal on first count and conviction on second should be reconsidered. | Combination of testimonies supported a rational finding of guilt on the second count. |
Key Cases Cited
- Craft v. State, 252 Ga. App. 834 (Ga. App. 2001) (intent and corroboration considerations in sufficiency reviews)
- Id. at 839 (1), citing Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. Supreme Court 1979) (standard for determining sufficiency of evidence)
- Smith v. State, 310 Ga. App. 392 (Ga. App. 2011) (statutory modifications not material to the case)
- Howard v. State, 268 Ga. App. 558 (Ga. App. 2004) (contextualizes sufficiency and credibility considerations)
- Grimsley v. State, 233 Ga. App. 781 (Ga. App. 1998) (sufficiency review standards)
- Coalson v. State, 237 Ga. App. 570 (Ga. App. 1999) (credibility and evidentiary credibility considerations)
- Stepho v. State, 312 Ga. App. 495 (Ga. App. 2011) (instruction and evaluation of witness testimony)