William Len Rainey v. State, 11-13-00297-CR

Appellant William Len Rainey was convicted in Eastland County, Texas of the second-degree felony indecency with a child by sexual contact.
The jury found the enhancement paragraph true, and Rainey was sentenced to life imprisonment under Penal Code §12.42(c)(2)(A)(i).
The State sought to admit the complainant’s outcry statement through Officer Nickie Gonzales under Article 38.072, after proper notice.
RaIney challenged the designation of the outcry witness and the reliability ruling, arguing the outcry witness was not the first person the victim told and that reliability was improperly determined.
The court conducted a hearing outside the jury, admitted the outcry testimony, and held the limitations and admissibility fell within Article 38.072; the judgment was affirmed on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the outcry witness designation was proper	Rainey contends Gonzales was not the first person the complainant told.	Rainey argues improper designation allowed inadmissible hearsay.	No reversible error; designation was proper.
Whether the outcry statement was reliable under Article 38.072	Rainey argues the Norris factors were not satisfied.	State contends trial court reasonably found reliability.	No reversible error; statement found reliable and harmless error if any.

Montgomery v. State, 810 S.W.2d 372 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (zone of reasonable disagreement standard for admissibility)
Sanchez v. State, 354 S.W.3d 476 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (Article 38.072 reliability focused on time, content, and circumstances)
Norris v. State, 788 S.W.2d 65 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1990) (eleven-factor reliability considerations (not mandatory))
Buckley v. State, 758 S.W.2d 339 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1988) (indicia of reliability guidance for outcry statements)
Broderick v. State, 89 S.W.3d 696 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2002) (time of statement assessed with contemporaneous details)