Barrett v. State

Decision Date25 May 2022
Docket NumberS-21-0163
Citation509 P.3d 940
Parties Samuel Joseph BARRETT, Appellant (Defendant), v. The STATE of Wyoming, Appellee (Plaintiff).
CourtWyoming Supreme Court

Representing Appellant: Office of the State Public Defender: Diane Lozano, Wyoming State Public Defender; Kirk A. Morgan, Chief Appellate Counsel; David E. Westling, Senior Assistant Appellate Counsel. Argument by Mr. Westling.

Representing Appellee: Bridget Hill, Wyoming Attorney General; Jenny L. Craig, Deputy Attorney General; Joshua C. Eames, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Kristen R. Jones, Senior Assistant Attorney General. Argument by Ms. Jones.

Before FOX, C.J., and KAUTZ, BOOMGAARDEN, GRAY, and FENN, JJ.

BOOMGAARDEN, Justice.

[¶1] Following a jury trial, Samuel Joseph Barrett was convicted of six counts of first degree sexual assault, two counts of sexual exploitation of a child, and one count of blackmail. On appeal Mr. Barrett challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions for sexual exploitation of a child under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-4-303(b)(i) and (iv) (LexisNexis 2021). He also challenges the district court's admission of his prior conviction under W.R.E. 404(b). We affirm.

ISSUES

[¶2] We restate the issues:

I. Was there sufficient evidence at trial to support Mr. Barrett's convictions for sexual exploitation of a child under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-4-303(b)(i) and (iv) ?
II. Did the district court abuse its discretion by admitting evidence of Mr. Barrett's prior conviction under W.R.E. 404(b) ?
FACTS

[¶3] Mr. Barrett's crimes involved three adult victims—AH, AG, and KC—and one child victim—his son. Mr. Barrett's involvement with the adult victims spanned several years.

[¶4] His relationship with AH dated back to approximately 2009, when he pleaded guilty to and was convicted of second degree sexual abuse of a minor for his relationship with her. She worked as a babysitter in his home. Mr. Barrett was required to register as a sex offender as a result of this conviction.

[¶5] Almost a decade later, AH, now in her 20s, moved to Mills, Wyoming, and began running into Mr. Barrett at Walmart. On at least two occasions, he apologized to AH for what happened when she was a teenager. During a chance encounter in June 2018, he bought minutes for her phone, noted that it looked like she could use some financial help, suggested he would be willing to give her money for sexual favors, and asked her to meet him for coffee. AH agreed to meet Mr. Barrett for coffee but never showed up.1

[¶6] In April 2019, AH ran into Mr. Barrett at a gas station, where he again apologized to her for what happened when she was a teenager. He offered to help her purchase a car as amends, reassuring her that he did not expect any sexual favors in return. AH agreed to meet him at a public location later that day so he could give her a check. But when she arrived he claimed he forgot his checkbook and asked her to follow him to his home, which she did.

[¶7] On reaching Mr. Barrett's home, AH parked in the driveway and followed Mr. Barrett into the garage. As they approached the back of the garage AH realized Mr. Barrett had a gun. He pointed the gun at AH's head and said, "You ruined my life, and now I'm going to ruin yours." He then made her perform oral sex on him. He also tried to force her to have anal sex but was interrupted by AH's dog jumping out of her car. Mr. Barrett followed AH out to the driveway so she could retrieve the dog. After she did so, Mr. Barrett's phone rang and he aggressively told her to leave, threatening her not to call the police. AH drove down the street, called a friend, and then called 911 to report the assault. Dispatch instructed AH to drive to a nearby park where she told police what happened.

[¶8] During the resulting investigation, the lead detective learned that in 2015 the Natrona County Sheriff's Office investigated an allegation that Mr. Barrett sexually assaulted another woman, AG. Police reinterviewed her.

[¶9] According to AG, she went to Mr. Barrett's home in November 2014 to babysit his infant son. Mr. Barrett asked her to change the child's diaper so she gathered the necessary supplies and kneeled down in front of the child. When she looked up, Mr. Barrett was pointing a gun at her and he told her to perform oral sex on the child. Terrified, AG leaned down, tried to hide the side of her face with her hair, and repeatedly kissed the child's stomach. Mr. Barrett then yelled, "What are you doing?" AG looked up and he was pointing a phone camera at her. After filming the video, Mr. Barrett led AG to a bedroom where he sexually assaulted her.

[¶10] Over the next six months, Mr. Barrett used the video of AG and his son to blackmail AG, threatening to release the video unless she engaged in sex with him and pretended to be his girlfriend. On one occasion in July 2015, Mr. Barrett had AG meet him in a parking lot where he sexually assaulted her in his car. Afterwards, he rented a motel room where he sexually assaulted her again. When AG returned home, she told her parents what had been happening, went to the hospital for a sexual assault examination, and then reported everything to the Natrona County Sherriff's Office. The Sheriff's Office investigated the allegation but never submitted the case to the District Attorney's Office for charges; the case went cold.

[¶11] Also during the 2019 investigation, police came across KC's name and contacted her for an interview. According to KC, she began a "friends with benefits" relationship with Mr. Barrett in 2010. Mr. Barrett sometimes paid her for sex; other times they went out to eat or engaged in sex without any money exchanged.

[¶12] In April 2012, KC had an encounter with Mr. Barrett that did not go as expected. While visiting Mr. Barrett at his home, he surprised her from behind and put a gun to her back. He then led her to a bedroom where he ordered her to perform oral sex on him. Afterwards, he made her rinse her mouth out with mouthwash, erased his phone number from her phone, and told her to leave and never contact him again. Mr. Barrett threatened to kill her and her family if she told anyone what happened. KC did not report the assault at that time.

[¶13] Three years later, KC and Mr. Barrett resumed their relationship and then, in February 2019, she had another encounter with him that did not go as expected. This time KC went to Mr. Barrett's home to pick up money he had agreed to give her for a trip to Las Vegas. He asked her to have sex, but she declined. He then told her the money was on a nearby shelf. When she bent over to get the money, he rushed her from behind and choked her until she passed out. When she awoke, he made her go to a bedroom where he sexually assaulted her. After the assault, he made her shower, reapply her make-up, and record a video pretending she was fine. Mr. Barrett threatened to kill her and her family if she told anyone what happened.

She felt reluctant to call the police because she had a pending warrant.

[¶14] In July 2019, the State charged Mr. Barrett with seven counts of first degree sexual assault, seven counts of second degree sexual assault, two counts of sexual exploitation of a child, and one count of blackmail.2 He pleaded not guilty.

[¶15] Before trial, Mr. Barrett filed a demand for notice of the State's intent to introduce W.R.E. 404(b) evidence. The State provided notice that it intended to introduce Mr. Barrett's 2009 conviction for second degree sexual abuse of a minor to show motive, intent, a general course of conduct, and to give the jury a general understanding of the relationship between Mr. Barrett and AH. In his written response and at a pretrial hearing, Mr. Barrett conceded his prior conviction was admissible to show course of conduct. The court conducted the required W.R.E. 404(b) analysis and admitted the evidence to show motive and course of conduct. We discuss the pretrial proceedings related to admission of the prior conviction and the court's decision in more detail as relevant to our 404(b) analysis.

[¶16] The case went to trial on nine charges, including six counts of first degree sexual assault—one involving AH, two involving KC, and three involving AG. The charges at trial also included one count of sexual exploitation of a child for creating the video, one count of sexual exploitation of a child for possessing the video, and one count of blackmailing AG.

[¶17] The State called more than 20 witnesses. AH, AG, and KC each testified about their relationship with Mr. Barrett. Numerous law enforcement officers testified about the 2019 and 2015 investigations. An expert addressed sexual assault reporting patterns and victim behavior generally. A Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner discussed AG's and AH's sexual assault examinations. The State also introduced numerous exhibits, including AH's 911 call, the video Mr. Barrett recorded of AG and his son, text messages between Mr. Barrett and the victims, and audio recordings of Mr. Barrett and various individuals including the victims.

[¶18] Mr. Barrett exercised his constitutional right not to testify. Through cross-examination, exhibits, and argument he challenged each woman's credibility, contended they made up the allegations, and offered an alternative explanation for most events.

[¶19] The jury found Mr. Barrett guilty on all nine counts. The court convicted him of those offenses and imposed a lengthy sentence. Mr. Barrett timely appealed.

DISCUSSION
I. There was sufficient evidence at trial to support Mr. Barrett's convictions for sexual exploitation of a child under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-4-303(b)(i) and (iv).

[¶20] Our sufficiency of the evidence standard of review is well established. We "examine[ ] the evidence in the light most favorable to the State." Cotney v. State , 2022 WY 17, ¶ 9, 503 P.3d 58, 63 (Wyo. 2022) (quoting Birch v. State , 2018 WY 73, ¶ 25, 421 P.3d 528, 536 (Wyo. 2018) ). "We accept all evidence favorable to the State as true and give the State's evidence every...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Ogden v. State
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • September 13, 2022
    ...705 (Wyo. 2015) ). "We ‘examine[ ] the evidence in the light most favorable to the State.’ " Barrett v. State , 2022 WY 64, ¶ 20, 509 P.3d 940, 945 (Wyo. 2022) (quoting Cotney v. State , 2022 WY 17, ¶ 9, 503 P.3d 58, 63 (Wyo. 2022) ). "We accept all evidence favorable to the State as true a......
  • Ogden v. State
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • September 13, 2022
    ...favorable to the State as true and give the State's evidence every favorable inference which can reasonably and fairly be drawn from it." Id. (quoting Cotney, ¶ 9, 503 P.3d at 63). "We also disregard any evidence favorable to the appellant that conflicts with the State's evidence." Id. (quo......
  • Anderson v. State
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • September 27, 2022
    ...objection, and will review the admission of other acts evidence for an abuse of discretion. Barrett v. State , 2022 WY 64, ¶ 41, 509 P.3d 940, 948 (Wyo. 2022) (citing Mayhew v. State , 2019 WY 38, ¶ 23, 438 P.3d 617, 623 (Wyo. 2019) ). "Evidentiary rulings are within the sound discretion of......
  • Schuerman v. State
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • December 21, 2022
    ...and holding there was no requirement for the jury to be instructed on specific intent.); Barrett v. State , 2022 WY 64, ¶ 36, 509 P.3d 940, 948 (Wyo. 2022) (Finding sufficient evidence of the element knowingly to support conviction of sexual exploitation of a child under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT