State of Tennessee v. David Black, W2016-02478-CCA-R3-CD

In April 2016 a Shelby County jury convicted David Black of attempted rape of a child and aggravated sexual battery for conduct that occurred in April 2013 while a then-12-year-old victim stayed at his residence.
The victim testified the defendant flipped her onto a bed, removed her pants and underwear, applied Vaseline to his erect penis, attempted to penetrate her from behind, and she pushed him off; she touched his penis while trying to push him away.
Two cousins who were staying in the house reportedly slept through the incident; one cousin (C.Y.) testified at trial that Black gave the victim preferential treatment (driving his car, extra food, separating her from boys).
The victim first disclosed the abuse to police in March 2014 after becoming upset at a school presentation; she had earlier told a Child Advocacy Center interviewer a date inconsistent with trial testimony.
Defense presented time-clock and room-condition evidence, and the defendant did not testify. The jury convicted; the trial court merged counts and sentenced Black to 12 years at 100% service.
On appeal Black argued (1) the trial court erred by admitting C.Y.’s testimony about preferential treatment as improper character/bad-act evidence, and (2) the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Black)	Held
Admissibility of C.Y.’s testimony about preferential treatment	Testimony was admissible and not 404(b) prior-bad-act evidence; relevant background/context	Testimony was improper character/propensity evidence that was highly prejudicial	Waived on appeal for insufficient specificity in motion for new trial; alternatively harmless error
Sufficiency of evidence for aggravated sexual battery	Victim’s testimony that she intentionally touched defendant’s erect penis while pushing him away supports sexual contact	Contradictions in date, sleeping positions, and credibility undermine conviction	Evidence sufficient; jury credibility findings upheld
Sufficiency of evidence for attempted rape of a child	Victim’s testimony that defendant removed her clothing, prepared to penetrate (Vaseline, erect penis), and attempted penetration establishes substantial step toward penetration	Inconsistencies and alibi/time records challenge attempt and opportunity	Evidence sufficient to support attempted rape conviction; conviction affirmed
Whether error warrants reversal despite waiver	State: any error was harmless given strong proof	Black: admission affected substantial rights and was prejudicial	Court exercised plain-error/harmless-analysis: no substantial right affected; affirmance upheld

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes the standard for appellate review of sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. 2011) (appellate deference to jury on witness credibility and factual inferences)
State v. Cabbage, 571 S.W.2d 832 (Tenn. 1978) (trial court findings of fact and credibility determinations are for the trier of fact)
Fahey v. Eldridge, 46 S.W.3d 138 (Tenn. 2001) (requirements for preserving issues in motion for new trial)
Waters v. Coker, 229 S.W.3d 682 (Tenn. 2007) (motion for new trial must specify issues with reasonable certainty)
State v. Smith, 24 S.W.3d 274 (Tenn. 2000) (harmless-error principles and substantial-rights analysis)
State v. Adkisson, 899 S.W.2d 626 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994) (harmless-error framework)
State v. Winters, 137 S.W.3d 641 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003) (application of Jackson sufficiency standard)