Watson v. the State
329 Ga. App. 334
Ga. Ct. App.2014Background
- After a jury trial, Watson was convicted of two counts of sexual battery as lesser included offenses to child molestation against his teenage daughter K.P. and one count of child molestation against K.P.’s friend M.S.
- Watson appeals arguing insufficiency of evidence, improper “unanimity” jury charge, misstatement that a minor cannot consent to sexual conduct, exclusion of good character evidence, ineffective assistance of counsel, and failure to merge convictions for sentencing.
- K.P. testified about Watson examining and touching her breasts and pubic area on several occasions, including an instance with a towel where he touched her after lifting the towel.
- M.S., then 15, testified about the November 11 incident where Watson touched her breasts, placed a hand on her buttocks, and touched her vagina, and stated Watson had expressed sexual interest and said he wanted to taste her.
- A Naval Criminal Investigative Services agent testified to Watson’s inconsistent accounts and the recording of his interview.
- The court affirmed all rulings, holding the evidence sufficient, charges proper, constitutional challenges not properly raised, good character evidence properly excluded as guided by the evidence rules, and no error in refusing to merge the two sexual battery convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence for child molestation | Watson | Watson | Sufficient evidence shown |
| Unanimity/lesser‑included charge procedure | Watson | Watson | Sequential charges permissible; no requirement of unanimity for greater offense before lesser |
| Minor consent charge under sexual battery statute | Watson | Watson | Charge accurate; constitutional challenge not properly raised; overbreadth not reached on appeal |
| Good character evidence ruling | Watson | Watson | No error; testimony restricted by evidentiary rules |
| Merger for sentencing | Watson | Watson | No merger; convictions charged separate and distinct acts |
Key Cases Cited
- Cantrell v. State, 266 Ga. 700 (1996) (unanimity requirement for lesser offenses; sequential charging permissible)
- Yaeger v. State, 274 Ga. 216 (2001) (sequential charges allowed if greater offense not required to be unanimous)
- Camphor v. State, 272 Ga. 408 (2000) (approval of sequential lesser‑included offenses)
- Armstrong v. State, 277 Ga. 122 (2003) (sequential lesser offense charging permissible)
- Kunselman v. State, 232 Ga. App. 323 (1998) (distinguishes improper unanimity instruction)
- Anderson v. State, 306 Ga. App. 423 (2010) (merger considerations for sentencing)
- Drake v. State, 239 Ga. 232 (1977) (age of victim automatically proves lack of consent in some contexts)
- Strickland v. State, 223 Ga. App. 772 (1996) (ineffective assistance standard; need both deficient performance and prejudice)