Kirby v. StateKirby v. State
- Reporters:
- Before:
- Taylor
Frank David Kirby was convicted of rape in the first degree, a violation of
On a cold Friday night, January 23, 1981, the eighteen-year-old victim was exiting her car in a pizza parlor‘s parking lot when she was forcibly abducted by three men in a red pickup truck; Steve Chamblee approached her under the pretense of needing directions and then slugged her and dragged her to the truck, where the appellant helped to force her onto the floor-board; the appellant‘s brother, Billy Joe Kirby, drove the truck. They kept her jammed down on the floorboard, and while a knife was pointed at her throat, she was stripped, slapped, pinched, and forced to perform oral sex on Chamblee and the appellant.
At one point, she tried to escape by jumping out of the truck, only to be grabbed and held while her bare feet were dragging on the pavement. For the next eleven hours, she was brutally assaulted, sodomized, and gang raped. The appellant and his accomplices stopped twice, once in a remote place, and again at a garbage dump. At each place they raped and sodomized her, once pouring beer onto her open wounds. Ultimately, she was released and finally given some of her ragged clothing.
I
The appellant claims the statute of limitations had run prior to the commencement of the prosecution. This heinous crime occurred on January 23, 1981, and he was not indicted until April 5, 1985, more than four years after the offense. He contends that the three-year statute of limitations provision in
We have recently decided this same issue, only involving robbery, and follow the decision of our Supreme Court. See Carroll v. State, 492 So.2d 323 (Ala.Cr.App. 1986). Accordingly, we hold that there is no period of limitations for the offense of rape. Additionally, we note that the legislature rewrote
II
Next, the appellant claims that the trial court erred in not granting a motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the State‘s case. He argues that the State did not prove proper venue. Because the abduction and the forcing of the victim to
III
The appellant raises two other issues involving a tape recording, and a transcript thereof, of the victim‘s statement. We find no error, and see no need to discuss the matter. Having addressed the issues having merit, we affirm the appellant‘s judgment and sentence.
AFFIRMED.
All the Judges concu