415 S.W.3d 740
Mo. Ct. App.2013Background
- Defendant Marlin Dallas Lane was convicted by a jury of first‑degree statutory sodomy for acts with Victim during Aug–Sep 2009 and sentenced to 12 years.
- Victim was born November 2006 and was about three years old during the alleged conduct; Victim’s parents divorced in 2007.
- Victim’s statements were aired through a CAC interview (States Exhibit 2) and Mother’s testimony; a pretrial Chapter 491 hearing addressed reliability.
- Medical evaluations (SAFE exam) in 2009 and subsequent examinations showed genital warts and findings consistent with sexual contact; HPV discussion supported potential abuse.
- Venue was changed to Hickory County; a Chapter 491 hearing determined Victim’s out-of-court statements were admissible as substantive evidence under § 491.075.
- Defendant challenged admission of Victim’s statements and later challenged related exhibits and proceedings; the court affirmed admission and denied post‑trial relief; conviction affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of Victim’s out-of-court statements under § 491.075 | State argues reliability established at hearing; statements properly admitted | Lane contends statements were unreliable hearsay | Admissible; trial court did not abuse discretion |
| Sufficiency of the evidence for statutory sodomy | Evidence supports deviate sexual intercourse with a child under 12 | No penetration proven; only finger touching | Sufficient evidence to submit to jury; conviction upheld |
| Juror nondisclosure or misconduct | N/A | Juror concealed bias; deprived fair trial | No abuse of discretion; nondisclosure not proven; no grounds for new trial |
| Plain error in closing argument | N/A | Prosecutor misstated evidence and urged inference | No plain error; no manifest injustice; no reversal |
| Right to a complete defense and admission under § 491.075 | Admitted statements do not preclude complete defense | Admission violated due process | Reviewed and rejected; § 491.075 does not violate due process when properly applied |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. O’Brien, 857 S.W.2d 212 (Mo. banc 1993) (review of sufficiency of evidence to submit to jury; light most favorable to the State)
- State v. Wadlow, 370 S.W.3d 315 (Mo. App. 2012) (abuse of discretion standard for admissibility of child statements under § 491.075)
- State v. Sprinkle, 122 S.W.3d 652 (Mo. App. 2003) (reliability evaluation for § 491.075 hearing; totality of circumstances)
- Benwire, 98 S.W.3d 618 (Mo. App. 2003) (out-of-court statements admissible as substantive evidence; credibility for jury to resolve)