State v. Johnson, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 161

Johnson was convicted of statutory rape in Missouri; trial court excluded testimony from his sister about the victim's sexual activity under the rape shield law.
The victim was in middle school at the time; she initially kept silent, later reported the assault after a friend told her mother, leading to police involvement.
The victim's pelvic exam showed hymen transections consistent with the complaint; Johnson admitted intercourse but claimed it was consensual.
The defense theory at trial was that no intercourse occurred; Johnson acknowledged an interview with police and a prior admission but claimed he lied to quiet the officer.
On appeal, Johnson challenged the exclusion of his sister's testimony; the State argued preservation and admissibility issues under rape shield and hearsay rules.
The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the issue was not preserved for appeal and, alternatively, the proffered testimony was inadmissible hearsay.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the sister's testimony properly excluded under rape shield law?	Johnson	Johnson	Not preserved; even if considered, inadmissible hearsay
Did the motion for new trial preserve the error for appellate review on sister-testimony?	Johnson	Johnson	Not preserved; motion failed to raise this issue

State v. Colvin, 312 S.W.3d 436 (Mo.App.2010) (sufficiency review and favorable-view-of-the-evidence approach)
State v. Cobb, 336 S.W.3d 201 (Mo.App.2011) (allocation of preservation and evidentiary issues in appeals)
State v. Comte, 141 S.W.3d 89 (Mo.App.2004) (offers of proof requirement and limitations to preserve error)