State v. Perkins, 83 So. 3d 250

Perkins was charged by Jefferson Parish District Attorney with sexual battery upon a known juvenile (Count One) and indecent behavior with a juvenile (Count Two).
A jury found Perkins guilty on both counts on June 2, 2010, and sentencing followed on June 17, 2010 to two years in the Department of Corrections for each count, without parole or suspension.
The victim, B.H., was 15 at trial and had cohabitated with Perkins as a father-figure; she testified about multiple alleged incidents of touching and lewd conduct.
The State introduced a recorded CAC interview in which B.H. described several incidents; trial testimony acknowledged she was uncomfortable testifying and had previously stated differing views about the events.
Perkins argued the victim recanted and that her trial testimony was unreliable; the defense contended the State failed to prove the elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
The trial court denied motions for new trial and reconsideration; Perkins appeals alleging insufficient evidence and errors patent.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the evidence sufficient to sustain the two convictions?	Perkins argues BH recanted and trial testimony lacked reliability.	Perkins contends the State failed to prove sexual battery and indecent behavior beyond reasonable doubt.	Yes; evidence, viewed in light favorable to the State, supported both convictions.
Is testimony requiring credibility determinations properly resolved by the factfinder despite contradictions?	Questioning the victim's credibility undermines sufficiency.	Jury may credit recorded statements over inconsistent trial testimony.	Yes; the jury may resolve credibility and is not to have credibility reevaluated on appeal when there is no irreconcilable conflict.
Did the trial record contain patent errors requiring correction on appeal?	No effect on convictions; but ensure proper procedural form.	There are patent errors in the commitment/record about sentencing terms and Boykin waiver.	Yes; remand for correction of commitment to conform to transcript and to reflect hard labor and Boykin waiver.

State v. Turner, 904 So. 2d 816 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2005) (credibility determinations in sufficiency review)
State v. Schenck, 513 So. 2d 1159 (La. 1987) (elements of indecent behavior with juveniles; standard of proof)
State v. Hotoph, 750 So. 2d 1036 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1999) (victim testimony alone can sustain sexual offenses)
State v. Holley, 799 So. 2d 578 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2001) (due process in evaluating conflicting victim testimony)
State v. Singleton, 922 So.2d 647 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2006) (trial court credibility determinations are not subject to second-guessing on appeal)
State v. Lynch, 441 So. 2d 732 (La. 1983) (transcript controls when there is discrepancy with commitment)