Shannon Eliga Blair was convicted of felony murder and arson arising out of the stabbing death of Bobby Payton. 1 Finding no reversible error by the trial court, we affirm.
1. The jury was authorized to find that Blair had worked for the victim at a sandwich shop for four years and had engaged in occasional sexual acts with the victim over that four year period. On the day of the crimes, Blair, who was twenty years old, entered Payton’s trailer home, to which he had the key, and woke the sleeping victim. They argued and the victim told Blair, “I don’t want you no more.” Blair initially left the home then returned to the kitchen where the victim advanced on Blair while “lookfing] mean at me, angry.” Blair grabbed a kitchen knife and stabbed the victim 37 times, 23 in the back. Blair then set fire to the body and the trailer, burning himself in the process. Clothing items found in an area from which Blair was seen leaving had blood from the victim and a hair matching Blair’s. In several voluntary statements Blair made to police, he stated that he loved the victim and did not indicate that their relationship was not consensual. There was evidence that Blair was a gambler, that the victim had helped Blair with his gambling debts before, and that Blair was the exclusive beneficiary of the victim’s life insurance.
It was a question for the jury whether the circumstances justified Blair’s use of a deadly weapon against the victim. See
Akins v. State,
2. Blair contends the trial court erred by improperly restricting defense counsel’s opening statement. However, opening statements were not transcribed. “With neither an original transcript nor one prepared from recollection, we must presume that the trial court did not commit reversible error in controlling the content of defense
*669
counsel’s statement. [Cits.]”
Houston v. State,
3. Blair contends error in the exclusion of specific acts committed by the victim which Blair argues were relevant to his justification defense in that the evidence showed that the victim sought out and sexually assaulted young men and boys. See
Barber v. State,
“As a general rule, a victim’s character is not relevant or admissible in the murder trial. There is an exception when the defendant claims justification and offers evidence that the deceased was the first aggressor.” Under this exception, a defendant may present evidence of the victim’s specific acts of violence against the defendant and third persons. “Such evidence is admissible to show the victim’s character for violence or tendency to act in accordance with his or her character as it relates to the defendant’s claim of justification.”
(Footnotes omitted.)
Owens v. State,
4. Blair contends the trial court erred by excluding testimony by defense expert Dr. Buchanan that Blair had been sexually abused by the victim as a child and that the abuse was not consensual. The State challenged the admission of the testimony on the ground that it was cumulative, pointing out to the trial court that Dr. Loring,
*670
another expert defense witness, had based her diagnosis that Blair suffered from the battered person syndrome in part on the conclusion that Blair had been forcefully sexually assaulted by the victim. We need not address Blair’s arguments regarding the propriety of the State’s argument or the other bases given by the trial court for excluding Dr. Buchanan’s testimony
2
since we find that the exclusion of this evidence, even if error, was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of Blair’s guilt. See generally
Laney v. State,
Judgment affirmed.
Notes
The crimes occurred late February 23 or early February 24, 1997. Blair was indicted June 17,1997 in Carroll County on charges of murder, felony murder based on the underlying felony of aggravated assault, first degree arson and possession of a gun or knife during the commission of a crime. He was found guilty of felony murder and arson on May 1,1998 and was sentenced the same day to life imprisonment for the felony murder conviction with a consecutive 20 year sentence on the arson conviction. His motion for new trial, filed on May 26, 1998 and amended on March 2 and 3, 2000, was denied on June 27, 2000. A notice of appeal was filed July 18, 2000. The appeal was docketed September 21, 2000 and was orally argued January 22, 2001.
The trial court excluded the testimony because Dr. Buchanan was not qualified as an expert in adult psychology, Blair was an adult at the time the crimes were committed, and the question of whether Blair was sexually assaulted as a child was not relevant to his trial on the charged crimes.