No. 84-525
I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE O M N A A
F F OTN
1985
STATE O MONTANA,
F
Plaintiff and R e s p o n d e n t ,
-vs-
A. D. M.,
D e f e n d a n t and A p p e l l a n t .
APPEAL FROM: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e F i r s t J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t ,
I n and f o r t h e County o f Lewis & C l a r k ,
The H o n o r a b l e Henry L o b l e , J u d g e p r e s i d i n g .
COUNSEL O RECORD:
F
For A p p e l l a n t :
Cannon & Sheehy; Edmund F. Sheehy, H e l e n a , Montana
F o r Respondent:
Hon. Mike G r e e l y , A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , H e l e n a , Montana
Mike McGrath, County A t t o r n e y , H e l e n a , Montana
S u b m i t t e d on B r i e f s : A p r i l 11, 1985
Decided: J u n e 25, 1985
I
;,9 g - d
+
I
/-
Clerk
Mr. Justice L. C. Gulbrandson d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion o f the
Court
Defendant appea 1s from a conviction of felony sexua 1
a s s a u l t p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n 45-5-502, MCA, following a jury
t r i a l i n t h e F i r s t J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Lewis and C l a r k C o u n t y ,
on May 1 6 , 1984. We affirm.
School officials notified the authorities on October
24, 1 9 8 3 , t h a t d e f e n d a n t was a l l e g e d t o h a v e committed s e x u a l
a s s a u l t upon h i s f i v e - y e a r - o l d daughter. Rita Pickering, a
s o c i a l w o r k e r from t h e w e l f a r e d e p a r t m e n t , removed t h e c h i l d
from school on October 26 in order to interview her.
P i c k e r i n g and a s h e r i f f ' s d e p a r t m e n t d e t e c t i v e c o n d u c t e d and
r e c o r d e d an i n t e r v i e w o f t h e c h i l d and a s a r e s u l t s h e was
removed from defendant's home and placed in foster care.
In the interview, the c h i l d d e s c r i b e d how h e r father
had forced her t o play with h i s "winker dinker;" s h e used
a n a t o m i c a l l y c o r r e c t d o l l s t o d e m o n s t r a t e how s h e was f o r c e d
t o m a s t u r b a t e d e f e n d a n t and p e r f o r m o r a l s e x ; she described
the color, t a s t e and s m e l l o f e j a c u l a t e ; she t o l d Pickering
t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t had t o u c h e d h e r , s u c k e d h e r " b o o b i e s " and
g o t t e n on t o p o f h e r and p u t h i s p e n i s i n s i d e h e r ; s h e used
t h e d o l l s t o d e m o n s t r a t e how h e r f a t h e r had "humped" h e r ; she
said that she "bleeded" after these activities; and she
described a videotape her f a t h e r made o f these activities.
The defendant was arrested on February 1, 1984 and
c h a r g e d w i t h s e x u a l l y a s s a u l t i n g h i s d a u g h t e r on a number o f
occasions over t h e period of a year, with the l a s t assault
o c c u r r i n g O c t o b e r 25, 1983. He p l e d n o t g u i l t y and a j u r y
t r i a l was h e l d on May 1 4 , 15 and 1 6 , 1984.
At trial, the State produced the child's testimony
t h r o u g h a v i d e o t a p e t a k e n a t h e r f o s t e r home. Rita Pickering
and the foster mother testified that the child's earlier
s t a t e m e n t s and i n t e r v i e w s were c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e v i d e o t a p e d
testimony. A clinical psychologist who had examined the
c h i l d t e s t i f i e d t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f s e x u a l a c t i v i t y was beyond
t h a t which s h e would b e a b l e t o f a n t a s i z e ; h e r terminology
was c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h a t o f a f i v e o r s i x y e a r o l d ; and it
would b e v e r y u n l i k e l y t h a t she could have picked up such
i n f o r m a t i o n from w a t c h i n g p o r n o g r a p h y o r o t h e r p e o p l e engaged
i n sexual relations.
The d e f e n d a n t o f f e r e d t e s t i m o n y t h a t h i s o p p o r t u n i t y t o
e n g a g e i n t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s was r a r e b e c a u s e o f t h e p r e s e n c e
o f o t h e r a d u l t s i n t h e h o u s e and h i s a b s e n c e from home. He
testified that the terms the child used came from family
friends and that the child may have seen some sexually
e x p l i c i t v i d e o t a p e s h e owned.
The i s s u e s p r e s e n t e d on a p p e a l a r e :
(1) Was t h e v i c t i m ' s u n c o r r o b o r a t e d t e s t i m o n y , due t o
h e r age, s u f f i c i e n t t o convict defendant?
(2) Was the evidence insufficient as a whole to
convict defendant?
The d e f e n d a n t c o n t e n d s t h a t when a c h i l d o f t h i s age
testifies after undergoing therapy and counseling, her
testimony should be corroborated. He points out that the
information from t h e c h i l d became less r e l i a b l e due t o t h e
length of time between t h e o f f e n s e s and h e r t e s t i m o n y and
b e c a u s e s h e was r e q u i r e d t o r e c o u n t t h e e v e n t s i n c o u n s e l i n g
and on other occasions. I n Montana, a victim's testimony
does not require corroboration in a sexual assault case.
S t a t e v. Just ( 1 9 7 9 ) , 184 Mont. 262, 270-1, 6 0 2 P.2d 957,
962; S t a t e v. Metcalf ( 1 9 6 9 ) , 153 Mont. 369, 378, 457 P.2d
453, 458. On a t l e a s t two p r i o r o c c a s i o n s , t h i s Court has
found four-year old sexual assault victims competent to
testify. In S t a t e v. Rogers (Mont. 1 9 8 4 ) , 692 P.2d 2, 41
St.Rep. 2131, the child's testimony was consistent with
e a r l i e r statements t o others except f o r d e t a i l s a s t o dates
and t i m e s . In another recent case, S t a t e v. D.B.S. (Mont.
19851, P.2d , 42 S t . R e p . 770, the four-year old's
t e s t i m o n y was corroborated by only one other witness, the
c h i l d ' s mother. Here, t h e v i c t i m ' s t e s t i m o n y was c o n s i s t e n t
with her p r i o r reports and s u p p o r t e d by t h e p s y c h o l o g i s t ' s
testimony. She was competent to testify. Defendant' s
arguments also go to the weight or credibility of the
testimony. The j u r y had a l l t h e e v i d e n c e b e f o r e it and found
t h e c h i l d ' s testimony c r e d i b l e . W hold, i n accordance with
e
p r i o r Montana law, that the victim's testimony i n a sexual
a s s a u l t case does n o t r e q u i r e corroboration.
The defendant also argues that the evidence was
insufficient as a whole to support the jury's verdict of
g u i l t y of felony sexual assault. The t e s t f o r d e t e r m i n i n g i f
s u b s t a n t i a l evidence supports a conviction i s whether, a f t e r
viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the
prosecution, any rational t r i e r o f f a c t c o u l d h a v e found t h e
essential e l e m e n t s of the c r i m e beyond a reasonable doubt.
State v. Rodriguiz (Mont. 1981), 628 P.2d 280, 283, 38
St.Rep. 578F, 5781; and J a c k s o n v . V i r g i n i a ( 1 9 7 9 ) , 443 U.S.
307, 99 S . C t . 2781, 6 1 L.Ed.2d 560. Even i f t h e e v i d e n c e i s
weak and in c o n f l i c t with other evidence, it may s t i l l b e
substantial enough to support a verdict. State v. Hall
(Mont. 1 9 8 3 ) , 662 P.2d 1 3 0 6 , 1 3 0 8 , 40 S t . R e p . 621, 624.
Section 45-5-502(l), MCA on sexual assault provides:
"A p e r s o n who k n o w i n g l y s u b j e c t s a n o t h e r n o t h i s spouse t o
any sexual contact without consent commits the offense of
sexual a s s a u l t . " S e x u a l c o n t a c t i s d e f i n e d a s "any t o u c h i n g
of the sexual or other intimate parts of the person of
a n o t h e r f o r t h e purpose o f arousing o r g r a t i f y i n g t h e sexual
desire of e i t h e r party." S e c t i o n 45-2-101(60), MCA.
The v i c t i m t e s t i f i e d e x t e n s i v e l y by v i d e o t a p e a b o u t h e r
sexual a c t i v i t i e s with defendant. She p r o v i d e d d e t a i l s a b o u t
the surrounding circumstances and her testimony was
consistent with earlier interviews. The psychologist
testified that she was capable of providing reliable
information; that her description of sexual activities far
exceeded t h a t which c o u l d b e e x p e c t e d from someone who had
not engaged i n those activities; and that her description
used terminology consistent with that of a five or
six-year-old child. Although t h e v i d e o t a p e o f t h e s e s e x u a l
activities alleged to have been made was never found,
testimony at trial indicated defendant had at least one
hour's notice before the s h e r i f f ' s deputies arrived with a
s ~ a r c hw a r r a n t and t h e d e p u t i e s found a v i d e o c a m e r a , tape
p l a y e r and t a p e s on t h e p r e m i s e s .
We hold that the jury's verdict was supported by
s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e and w e w i l l n o t o v e r t u r n t h e c o n v i c t i o n
on a p p e a l .
W e concur:
__--