52 So. 3d 1021
La. Ct. App.2010Background
- Defendant convicted by jury of molestation of a juvenile and incest; victim KM was fourteen at trial; CC, the other daughter, was pregnant by Defendant, supporting incest claim; Defendant’s acts occurred in July–August 2008; DNA linked Defendant to CC’s child; sentences: 15 years for each conviction, consecutive; appeal argues insufficiency of evidence and excessiveness.
- Charges amended in 2009 to reflect offense date; trial court denied motion to reconsider sentence; no other visible errors patent.
- Victim KM testified about being fondled and pressured by Defendant; CC testified about Defendant’s actions and the pregnancy; Defendant denied the offenses.
- Court upheld convictions and sentences, finding sufficient evidence and no abuse of sentencing discretion; Defendant’s position of father provided a basis for control/supervision aggravator.
- The record supported lewd or lascivious acts aimed at arousing or gratifying sexual desires; jury credibility determinations favored the victims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Insufficiency of evidence to prove molestation of a juvenile | KM's testimony alone supports elements | No corroborating physical evidence; credibility issues | Sufficiency upheld; KM's testimony alone sufficient |
| Whether the State proved the required elements including position of control or supervision | Defendant abused position as father/guardian | No evidence of control over KM | Evidence supported control/supervision finding; assignment meritless |
| Excessiveness of sentences | Phenomenal harm warrants max penalties | Sentence excessive; excessive relative to offenses | Fifteen-year sentences not excessive; within statutory range and justified by circumstances |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Kennerson, 695 So.2d 1367 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1997) (sufficiency review and elements required for molestation of a juvenile)
- State v. Onstead, 875 So.2d 908 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2004) (position of control or supervision can be present without living with victim)
- Davis, 702 So.2d 1014 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1998) (caretaking context supports control/supervision element)
- State v. Roca, 866 So.2d 867 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2004) (one witness’s testimony alone may establish sexual offense elements if credible)
- State v. Rideaux, 916 So.2d 488 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2005) (victim testimony can sustain offense without physical evidence)
- State v. Ferguson, 4 So.3d 315 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2009) (extenuating factors for lewd molestation sentencing; aggravating circumstances)
- State v. Works, 899 So.2d 808 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2005) (aggravating factors in molestation sentences; guidance on conviction context)
- State v. Evans, 661 So.2d 600 (La.App. 2 Cir. 1995) (incest sentencing and aggravation considerations)
- State v. Butters, 527 So.2d 1023 (La.App. 1 Cir. 1988) (incest punishment and aggravation for prolonged offending)
- State v. Quebedeaux, 424 So.2d 1009 (La. 1982) (maximal penalties for serious offenses and guidance on discretion)