Atkins v. State
Decision Date | 20 August 2018 |
Docket Number | S17G1996 |
Citation | 818 S.E.2d 567,304 Ga. 240 |
Parties | ATKINS v. The STATE. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Christina Rupp Cribbs, GEORGIA PUBLIC DEFENDER COUNCIL—APPELLATE DIVISION, 104 Marietta Street NW Suite 600, Atlanta, Georgia 30303, for Appellant.
Paul L. Howard, Lyndsey Hurst Rudder, Arthur C. Walton, FULTON COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, 136 Pryor Street, S.W. 4th Floor, Atlanta, Georgia 30303, for Appellee.
In Atkins v. State, 342 Ga. App. 422, 803 S.E.2d 122 (2017), the Court of Appeals affirmed Jerome Atkins’s convictions for statutory rape and aggravated child molestation. Thereafter, we granted certiorari and posed the following two questions: (1) whether a victim’s prior statements can constitute sufficient corroboration under OCGA § 16-6-3 ; and (2) whether the defendant was properly prohibited under OCGA § 24-4-412 from seeking testimony regarding the sexual activity that was at issue in the trial. For the reasons set forth below, we find that a victim’s prior statements cannot constitute sufficient corroboration under OCGA § 16-6-3, and we reach the second question in a manner limited to the specific facts of this case, as more fully set forth below.
1. As set forth by the Court of Appeals, the facts of this case are as follows:
(Footnote omitted.) Atkins, supra, 342 Ga. App. at 422-424, 803 S.E.2d 122.
2. We first consider whether a victim’s prior statements can constitute sufficient corroboration under OCGA § 16-6-3. We find that they cannot.
OCGA § 16-6-3 (a) provides: "A person commits the offense of statutory rape when he or she engages in sexual intercourse with any person under the age of 16 years and not his or her spouse, provided that no conviction shall be had for this offense on the unsupported testimony of the victim ." (Emphasis supplied.) In other words, there must be some evidence that corroborates the victim’s testimony that the defendant committed the statutory rape. The purpose of the corroboration requirement is to "furnish[ ] the jury [with] a criterion for ascertaining the degree of credit which should be given to the testimony of the injured female." (Citation omitted.) Strickland v. State, 207 Ga. 284, 287 (5), 61 S.E.2d 118 (1950).
Corroborating evidence may be slight.
The quantum of corroboration needed in a statutory rape case is not that which is in itself sufficient to convict the accused, but only that amount of independent evidence which tends to prove that the incident occurred as alleged. Slight circumstances may be sufficient corroboration, and ultimately the question of corroboration is one for the jury.
(Citation and punctuation omitted; emphasis supplied.) Williamson v. State, 315 Ga. App. 421, 424 (1) (b), 727 S.E.2d 211 (2012).
Despite recognizing the requirement for independent evidence, the Court of Appeals has repeated the proposition in a series of cases that "a child-victim’s prior consistent statements, as recounted by third parties to whom such statements were made, can constitute sufficient substantive evidence of corroboration in a statutory rape case." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Brown v. State, 318 Ga. App. 334, 336 (1), 733 S.E.2d 863 (2012). See also, Byrd v. State, 258 Ga. App. 572, 573, 574 S.E.2d 655 (2002) ; Patterson v. State, 233 Ga. App. 776, 778 (1), 505 S.E.2d 518 (1998) ; Turner v. State, 223 Ga. App. 448, 450 (2), 477 S.E.2d 847 (1996) ; Long v. State, 189 Ga. App. 131 (2), 375 S.E.2d 274 (1988). These cases appear to trace back to Runion v. State, 180 Ga. App. 440, 349 S.E.2d 288 (1986). There, in response to a contention that there was insufficient corroboration of a statutory rape accusation, the Court of Appeals held:
" Tucker v. State, 173 Ga. App. 742 (1), 327 S.E.2d 852 (1985). The testimony of the victim was supported by that of the nurse who ... testified to the victim’s previous statements inculpatory of appellant. The victim’s testimony was also supported by appellant’s confession of other acts which would constitute child molestation of the victim. See Hill v. State, 159 Ga. App. 489 (1), 283 S.E.2d 703 (1981) ( ) The victim’s testimony in the instant case was sufficiently corroborated, and the evidence did not demand a verdict of acquittal.
Runion, supra, 180 Ga. App. at 440 (1), 349 S.E.2d 288. The statement that the victim’s initial outcry to the nurse was corroborating evidence became the basis for the Court of Appeals’ subsequent rulings. Runion, however, should not have been interpreted to mean that a victim’s prior consistent statement, standing alone , serves as a proper basis to support a conviction for statutory rape. As Runion makes clear, there was independent corroborating evidence available in that case to support the statutory rape conviction, namely the defendant’s confession of other sexual acts with the victim. This independent evidence satisfied the corroboration requirement.
The Court of Appeals has conflated the purpose and value of prior consistent statements, such as the initial outcry of the victim, with that of corroborating evidence providing independent details that support the victim’s accusations. We have previously explained the manner in which an initial outcry may be admitted as a prior consistent statement and its purpose once it is in evidence.
In Cuzzort [v. State, 254 Ga. 745, 334 S.E.2d 661 (1985) ], we held a prior consistent statement [such as an initial outcry by a statutory rape victim] was admissible where the veracity of the declarant was in issue, the declarant was available for trial under oath, and the declarant was subject to cross-examination. Additionally, in Cowart v. State, 294 Ga. 333 (4) (a), 751 S.E.2d 399 (2013), we re-emphasized that for a witness’s veracity to be in issue, the prior consistent statement must predate any allegation of recent fabrication by the witness.
Cobb v. Hart, 295 Ga. 89, 91 (2), 757 S.E.2d 840 (2014).
Corroborating evidence, however, is in a different category. Corroborating evidence is "[e]vidence that differs from but strengthens or confirms what other evidence shows (esp. that which needs support)." (Emphasis supplied.) Black’s Law Dictionary (10th ed. 2014). The value of a prior consistent statement is that it does not differ from a subsequent statement. The consistency of a prior statement of the statutory rape victim makes a subsequent statement that...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
White v. State
...rights."). See also Atkins v. State, 342 Ga. App. 422 (2) (b), 803 S.E.2d 122 (2017), reversed in part on other grounds, 304 Ga. 240, 818 S.E.2d 567 (2018). We also offer no opinion in this case on the question whether the admissibility of a victim’s prior false accusation of alleged sexual......
-
Patterson v. Kevon, LLC
... ... testimony but with facts such as a date of manufacture well within the customary shelf life, that the ice cream was batch tested and met all state and federal standards, and that the defendant received no other complaints about that batch of ice cream8 ... Similarly, here the Pattersons refuted ... ...
-
Cruz v. State
...alleged." (Citation omitted.) Pringle v. State , 281 Ga. App. 235, 237 (1) (a), 635 S.E.2d 839 (2006) ; see also Atkins v. State , 304 Ga. 240, 242 (2), 818 S.E.2d 567 (2018) (explaining the independent corroborating evidence is required to support statutory rape conviction). Such "corrobor......
-
Foster v. State, S18A1494
...State v. Almanza, ––– Ga. –––– (2), 820 S.E.2d 1, 2018 WL 4865949 (Case No. S18G0585; decided October 9, 2018) ; Atkins v. State, 304 Ga. 240 (2) n.1, 818 S.E.2d 567 (2018) ; State v. Frost, 297 Ga. 296, 773 S.E.2d 700 ...
-
Criminal Law
...Id. (quoting Baze v. Rees, 553 U.S. 35, 48 (2008)).13. Id. at 1134 (quoting Breyer, J., dissenting).14. O.C.G.A. § 16-6-3(a) (2019).15. 304 Ga. 240, 818 S.E.2d 567 (2018).16. Atkins, 304 Ga. at 240, 243-44, 818 S.E.2d at 569-71.17. Id. at 244, 818 S.E.2d at 571 (emphasis omitted). 18. Id. a......