Steward v. UNITED STATES
2010 D.C. App. LEXIS 616
| D.C. | 2010Background
- Steward was convicted in a bench trial of one count of misdemeanor sexual abuse of his fifteen-year-old stepdaughter, R.B.
- Appellant challenges the admissibility of evidence of his prior sexual conduct with R.B. and the denial of his motion for a judgment of acquittal.
- R.B. testified that Steward sexually abused her from childhood, including brushing against her, fondling, and an attempted intercourse, with the October 26 incident being the charged act.
- Two prior counts were dismissed for statute of limitations; the government sought to admit the prior-pattern evidence to show motive, intent, absence of mistake, and a common scheme under Drew and as to intent under Johnson.
- The trial court admitted the prior-crimes evidence; the court credited R.B.’s testimony and found Steward guilty on the October 26 incident.
- The court concluded the prior-sexual-conduct evidence satisfies the Koonce framework and that the government proved the prior acts by clear and convincing evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of prior acts evidence | Drew framework supports admission of prior abuse to show motive/intent/common plan. | Evidence is prejudicial and should be limited; not properly admissible under Drew. | Admissible under Drew and refined Koonce framework; no abuse of discretion. |
| Koonce framework applicability | Prior abuse of the same victim near-family setting satisfies Koonce prongs. | Not enough continuity or closeness to justify admissibility. | Prior abuse meets all four Koonce prongs; admissible. |
| Sufficiency of evidence for acquittal | There is probative evidence that Steward touched R.B.’s buttocks without permission to gratify sexual desires. | Evidence does not prove all elements beyond a reasonable doubt. | Evidence suffices for a reasonable juror to convict; denial of acquittal affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Drew v. United States, 331 F.2d 85 (D.C. Cir. 1964) (framework for admissibility of prior crimes to prove non-propensity facts)
- Pounds v. United States, 529 A.2d 791 (D.C. 1987) (narrow exception for sexual-offense context evidence; predisposition rationale)
- Koonce v. United States, 993 A.2d 544 (D.C. 2010) (defines four-prong framework for admissibility of prior sexual offenses)
- Graham v. United States, 746 A.2d 289 (D.C. 2000) (close familial relationship suffices for prior abuse evidence)
- Gary v. United States, 499 A.2d 815 (D.C. 1985) (victim's testimony need not be corroborated in sexual abuse cases)
- Groves v. United States, 564 A.2d 372 (D.C. 1989) (clear-and-convincing-evidence standard for prior-crimes linkage)
- Riddick v. United States, 995 A.2d 212 (D.C. 2010) (abuse-of-discretion standard for admission of evidence)
- Johnson v. United States, 683 A.2d 1087 (D.C. 1996) (en banc; alternative theory for admissibility of prior conduct)
- Cox v. United States, 999 A.2d 63 (D.C. 2010) (de novo review of judgment-of-acquittal; standard of review)
- Price v. United States, 746 A.2d 896 (D.C. 2000) (probative evidence requirement for acquittal analysis)