State v. FormanState v. Forman
A twelve person jury found defendant guilty as charged of committing incest with his twelve year-old daughter in violation of
We have considered those errors designаted by defendant and have also reviewed the record for any errors discoverable by a mere inspection of the pleadings and proceedings.
ERRORS PATENT
We have reviewed the record for any errors discoverable by an inspection of the pleadings and proceedings and have found none.
SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE
The crime of incest “is the marriage to or cohabitation with any ascendant or descendant ... with knowledge of their relationship.”
Defendant admitted he is the father of the victim. No evidence even suggеsts a lack of knowledge of the relationship. The victim testified that defendant had sexual intercоurse with her on several occasions over approximately three years.
Three days following the particular act of sexual intercourse which led to defendant‘s arrest, an emergеncy room doctor examined the victim. The doctor found the condition of the victim‘s vagina to bе unusual for a twelve year-old, and expressed his opinion of the condition‘s consistency with sexual intercourse on a regular basis.
The victim‘s mother related what she had observed regarding the defеndant‘s actions, and testified concerning the relationship between the defendant and her and thеir daughter. The details corroborated the victim‘s testimony.
The victim‘s mother and two of her aunts (sisters of thе defendant) testified to a
Defendant denied ever having sexual intercourse with his daughter. He stated that he had disciplined his daughter for recеiving late night phone calls from boys and for staying out too late. He also complained of hеr relationships with boys. The testimony of the victim and the other witnesses contradicted all of defendant‘s accusations against his daughter.
Finally, defendant asserted that his wife had prompted the child to mаke these allegations because his wife was very jealous of his girlfriends.
We have reviewed all оf the evidence and find that any rational trier of fact viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution could have found every essential element of the crime to havе been proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); State v. Fuller, 414 So.2d 306 (La.1982).
Assignment of Error No. 1
Defendant assigns as error the trial court‘s granting of the State‘s challenge for cause as to a prospective juror. The record reflects that the State used only three (3) of its eight (8) peremptory challenges. See
B. The erroneоus allowance to the state of a challenge for cause does not afford the defendant a ground for complaint, unless the effect of such ruling is the exercise by the state of more peremptory challenges than it is entitled to by law.
Even if the challenge for cause should not have been granted, therefore, defendant cannot complain because the State had nоt exhausted its peremptory challenges. State v. James, 431 So.2d 399 (La.1983), cert. denied, James v. Louisiana, ___ U.S. ___, 104 S.Ct. 520, 78 L.Ed.2d 705 (1983).
Further, the trial judge is vested with broad discretion in ruling on a challenge for cause. This ruling will not be disturbed on appeal absent a showing of abuse of that discretion. State v. Sylvester, 400 So.2d 640 (La.1981). The prospective juror said that he and defendant were friends, and that he saw him often because defendant went out with a friend of the juror‘s girlfriend‘s sister. He said that he did not want to sit on the case, but he thought that he could give everyone a fair trial. We find no abuse of discretion.
Assignment of Error No. 2
Defendant argues that his sentence is excessive.
The sentencing guidelines of
Once compliance with
Accordingly, we affirm defendant‘s conviction and sentence.
AFFIRMED.