State v. Harris, 83 So. 3d 269

Background

Harris was indicted September 9, 2004 for aggravated rape of a juvenile, involving incidents in 2004.
Trial began after various motions; a sanity hearing found Harris competent; suppression motions were ruled on in 2007 and 2009.
A Prieur hearing on September 2, 2009 addressed admissibility of other crimes evidence (L.C. case) under La.C.E. 412.2/404(B).
Trial court admitted evidence of a prior sexual offense (L.C.) despite an acquittal in that case; limiting instructions were given.
Harris was convicted by a 12-person jury of forcible rape and later received a 76-year hard labor sentence as a second-felony offender.
The appellate court affirmed the conviction, vacated the sentence, and remanded for resentencing due to an error patent regarding parole ineligibility.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence	Harris argues MB’s testimony is inconsistent and insufficient to convict.	Harris contends dates and incarceration create fatal contradictions with the verdict.	Evidence, including MB’s testimony, was sufficient to sustain the conviction.
Admissibility of other crimes evidence (L.C.)	L.C. acquittal should bar admission as collateral estoppel; due process concerns raised.	The state may introduce 412.2/404(B) evidence; collateral estoppel does not bar admissibility.	No error; 412.2/404(B) evidence properly admitted after balancing; no due process violation.
Acquittal instruction	Defendant requested instructions noting L.C. acquittal; failure to instruct prejudiced.	Acquittal instruction not required; otherwise prejudice was not shown.	No reversible prejudice; failure to give acquittal instruction did not affect the outcome.
Indictment quash for untimely commencement	Trial commenced beyond the two-year period without proper suspension.	Continuances and motions suspended the time; trial was timely.	Timely commencement; no error in denying the motion to quash.
Sentence—error patent and parole ineligibility	Honors the habitual offender sentence; needs proper determinate length with parole ineligibility specified.	Court failed to specify the parole-ineligibility term under the reference statute; determinate sentence required.	Sentence vacated; remanded to resentence with a determinate term and fixed parole ineligibility.

Key Cases Cited

State v. Robinson, 874 So.2d 66 (La. 2004) (one witness can be sufficient under Jackson if credible)
State v. Hotoph, 750 So.2d 1036 (La. App. 5th Cir. 1999) (victim testimony alone may prove sexual offense)
State v. Tapps, 832 So.2d 995 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2002) (trusts victim testimony where corroboration not required)
State v. Cotton, 778 So.2d 569 (La. 2001) (collateral estoppel does not bar 404(B) evidence after acquittal)
State v. Olivieri, 860 So.2d 207 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2003) (prior sexual offense evidence admissible if probative outweighs prejudice)
Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (U.S. 1997) (burden and prejudice considerations in evidentiary rulings)
State v. Williams, 830 So.2d 984 (La. 2002) (412.2 does not require a prior evidentiary Prieur hearing)
State v. Nguyen, 888 So.2d 900 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2004) (general rule for admissibility of other crimes evidence)
State v. Juluke, 725 So.2d 1293 (La. 1999) (Jackson standard does not permit second-guessing credibility findings)
State v. Harris, 998 So.2d 55 (La. 2008) (right to confrontation not implicated in pretrial matters)