322 S.E.2d 98 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1984
The defendant was convicted of two counts of rape involving two different victims on two different dates. In each case, the victim identified the defendant as her attacker, both at trial and at a pre-trial lineup; and in each case, medical testimony was presented concerning the nature of the attacks. On appeal, the defendant contends that the evidence in each case was insufficient and that he was denied the right to cross-examine one of the victims concerning certain felony charges against her. Held:
1. The evidence was sufficient to enable a rational trier of fact to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had carnal knowledge of both victims forcibly and without their consent. See generally Simmons v. State, 249 Ga. 860 (1) (295 SE2d 84) (1982).
2. Defense counsel was denied the opportunity to cross-examine one of the victims with regard to charges of aggravated assault, terroristic threats, and profane and abusive language which had been brought against her about six weeks prior to the alleged rape. Interpreting Davis v. Alaska, 415 U. S. 308 (94 SC 1105, 39 LE2d 347) (1974), and the authorities relied upon therein, the Georgia Supreme Court has held that “the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amend
Judgment affirmed.
