Robert Francisco Celio v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
30A05-1609-CR-2124
| Ind. Ct. App. | Jul 20, 2017Background
- Defendant Robert Celio, the biological father of victim L.D., rekindled a relationship with L.D.’s mother after paternity was established and moved in with the family.
- Celio committed repeated sexual assaults on L.D., including digital and penile vaginal penetration and penile anal penetration; some assaults involved choking, beating with a belt, and threats with a knife and a gun.
- L.D. did not disclose the abuse until nearly two years after being adopted; DCS investigated and Celio was charged with multiple felonies, including Class A child molesting and criminal deviate conduct.
- A jury convicted Celio; the trial court sentenced him to an aggregate 50-year term. He appealed the exclusion of evidence under Indiana Evidence Rule 412 (the Rape Shield Rule).
- Celio sought to introduce evidence that L.D. had been molested by three other men; the trial court excluded that evidence under Evid. R. 412, and Celio argued the exclusion violated his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether exclusion under Evid. R. 412 violated defendant's Sixth Amendment confrontation right | State: Rule 412 barred evidence of victim's other sexual behavior; exclusion was proper because no exception applied | Celio: Evidence of other molestations would show similar patterns or alternative perpetrators and was necessary for cross-examination under the constitutional exception in Evid. R. 412(b)(1)(C) | Court affirmed exclusion: defendant failed to identify record facts showing similarity or that exclusion violated constitutional rights; Rape Shield exclusion stood |
Key Cases Cited
- Beasley v. State, 46 N.E.3d 1232 (Ind. 2016) (abuse-of-discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
- Oatts v. State, 899 N.E.2d 714 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (limits on cross-examination where Rape Shield applies; similarity requirement for constitutional exception)
- Williams v. State, 691 N.E.2d 195 (Ind. 1997) (Sixth Amendment implicated when victim shows similar pattern of sexual acts)
- Pribie v. State, 46 N.E.3d 1241 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (timing of other sexual behavior is irrelevant to Rape Shield application)
- Walton v. State, 715 N.E.2d 824 (Ind. 1999) (relationship between Rape Shield Rule and statutory provisions)