Boggs v. Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 27 July 2018 |
| Docket Number | NO. 2015-CA-000702-MR,2015-CA-000702-MR |
| Parties | SAMMY LEE BOGGS APPELLANT v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL FROM LAUREL CIRCUIT COURT
On May 26, 2013, the alleged victim, M.A., reported that Boggs had sexually assaulted her. Following a police investigation, Boggs was arrested. The Laurel County Grand Jury returned an indictment charging Boggs with Rape, First Degree. A jury trial was held on February 10, 2015. Boggs did not testify at the trial or present any witnesses on his behalf. The relevant evidence presented by the Commonwealth at trial is summarized below.
M.A. testified that she was acquainted with John Osborne because she had done some cleaning for him in the past. On the evening of May 25, 2013,M.A. went to Osborne's trailer in Laurel County, Kentucky. M.A. was not romantically involved with Osborne, but she had stayed the night at his trailer before and planned to do so that evening. M.A. testified that she arrived at Osborne's trailer early in the evening while it was still daylight. However, she did not deny that she told the investigating officer on July 10, 2013, that she arrived at Osborne's trailer closer to ten in the evening. M.A. admitted that she smoked marijuana at her home prior to going to Osborne's trailer, but denied that she consumed any alcohol beforehand.
When M.A. arrived at Osborne's trailer, Boggs was already present. M.A. stated that she had met Boggs previously, but they were not friends. M.A. testified to drinking a beer and then beginning to drink a second beer retrieved for her by Boggs. Before finishing the second beer, M.A. testified that she began to feel extremely tired and sleepy. She asked Osborne if she could go lay down in his room. He told her that was fine. M.A. took her overnight bag to Osborne's room, shut the door behind her, and laid down on the bed on top of the covers. M.A. testified that Boggs and Osborne stayed behind in the living room to talk and watch television.
M.A. testified that she awoke in the middle of the night, but was unable to open her eyes or move her body. She alleged that it was at this moment that she realized someone was having sex with her. She explained that she couldtell someone was lifting her legs up and could feel that person in her vagina. M.A. stated she did not know who was having sex with her because she could not open her eyes. She next remembers waking up when it became daylight outside. M.A. testified that she was wearing her t-shirt and bra, but someone had removed her pajama bottoms and panties. M.A. saw Boggs, without his shirt, next to her on the bed. She asked Boggs why he had "done this to her," but he did not respond. She then left the room. At her request, Osborne gave her a ride back to her trailer.
Upon arriving home, M.A. encountered her daughter and relayed the events of the previous night. M.A.'s daughter told her not to take a shower and then called 911. An ambulance transported M.A. to St. Joseph's Hospital where a "rape kit" analysis was performed. Semen was found and subsequent DNA analysis matched this DNA to Boggs's DNA profile with the chance of the DNA found in and on M.A. belonging to another individual being one in 150 quadrillion.
Boggs did not testify at trial, but a police detective testified that she interviewed Boggs on July 15, 2013, at the London Police Department. The statement was recorded. This recording was played for the jury. During the interview, Boggs admitted that he was at Osborne's trailer one night in May 2013. He told the investigator that he believed there was "a colored woman" at Osborne's trailer that night.2 Boggs said that he went to bed that night and that when he didso no one else was in the bed. He then told the investigator that he was beaten by two individuals the next day because of the accusations M.A. made against him, and that he did not want to talk about the incident any further. Boggs refused to identify the individuals who beat him up. At that point, Boggs requested to terminate the interview.
Relevant to this appeal, the trial court would not permit Boggs to present evidence during his defense regarding the results of blood alcohol level tests administered by the hospital as part of its treatment of M.A. Boggs asserted that the results of these tests were entirely inconsistent with M.A.'s testimony that she had only consumed a little more than one beer prior to the alleged rape. The Commonwealth acknowledged that this evidence was relevant as it tended to discredit M.A.'s version of the events. Even though the Commonwealth acknowledged that the results of the blood tests were contained in M.A.'s certified medical records, which the trial court had previously ordered the hospital to provide to the Commonwealth, it argued that unless Boggs could produce the individual(s) who drew the blood samples and the laboratory technician who tested them, the evidence could not be admitted. The trial court ultimately determined that no evidence regarding the blood tests could be introduced by Boggs without such testimony. At this point, Boggs's counsel indicated that he was going to try and subpoena the necessary hospital personnel prior to the end of trial.
Ultimately, Boggs was able to procure two different hospital employees: Gale Boggs, the Director of Laboratory Services at St. Joseph's Hospital (hereinafter referred to as "Director Gale"), and Steve Gooden, the laboratory technician who performed the first blood test. The trial court allowed Boggs to present the testimony of these witnesses by avowal.
Director Gale testified that she had been the Director of Laboratory Services at St. Joseph Hospital for the past eighteen years. Boggs's counsel showed Director Gale a copy of M.A.'s medical records. Director Gale confirmed that the records were M.A.'s hospital records from May 26, 2013, and specifically that the records contained laboratory reports for the blood samples taken from M.A. as part of her treatment at the hospital that day.
Director Gale then explained the standard procedure for obtaining laboratory results. She indicated that the process begins when a physician orders a test. In M.A.'s case, a blood test was ordered by the emergency room department ("E.R."). In response to the request, a technician collects the sample. The sample is packaged in a biohazard bag and sent up to the laboratory through a pneumatic tube system. Once the specimen is received by the laboratory, it is sent to a workstation for processing. A trained laboratory technician then performs the ordered test on the specimen. Once the test is complete, the laboratory technician verifies the result, prepares the report, and sends the report to the requestingphysician or department. The following day, either Director Gale, her subordinate, or the weekend supervisor performs a retrospective verification for accuracy and completeness.
Director Gale reviewed the laboratory reports generated for M.A. on May 26, 2013. She testified that the first test was performed when M.A. presented to the E.R. as part of a larger blood test panel. This is standard protocol. The laboratory report indicated that the sample was drawn by "D.D.". Director Gale testified that Deb Daniels is the E.R. technician with those initials who drew the blood. The results from this first test showed that M.A. had a blood alcohol level of 264 mg/dl (.264 g/dl). A second test was ordered from the E.R. department at 16:55 (4:00 p.m.); it was collected at 17:50 (5:50 p.m.); received in the laboratory at 17:52 (5:52 p.m.); and verified (meaning the test result was completed and reviewed) at 18:12 (6:12 p.m.) The identity of the technician who drew this second blood sample from M.A. was not listed for this test. The results of this test showed that M.A. had a blood alcohol level of 186 mg/dl (.168 g/dl). A final test was ordered at 20:49 (7:49 p.m.); it was collected by D.D. at 20:50 (7:50 p.m.); received in laboratory at 20:53 (7:53); and verified at 21:19 (8:19 p.m.). The test result for alcohol for this final sample was 114 mg/dl (.114g/dl).
Steve Gooden testified next. Gooden is a technologist in the laboratory and is the head of laboratory's chemistry department. Gooden testifiedthat he was the laboratory technician who retrieved M.A.'s blood sample when it arrived in the laboratory. He explained the process used to test M.A.'s blood sample and identified the type of machine used to test the sample, a Cobas 6000 Analyzer by Roche Diagnostics. This type of machine tests blood serum levels. Gooden confirmed that the results for the first test showed that M.A. had an alcohol...
To continue reading
Request your trial