Cordell v. State, 112118 AKCA, A-12272

Docket Nº:A-12272
Opinion Judge:SUDDOCK JUDGE.
Party Name:JAMIE DON CORDELL, Appellant, v. STATE OF ALASKA, Appellee.
Attorney:Megan R. Webb, Assistant Public Defender, and Quinlan Steiner, Public Defender, Anchorage, for the Appellant. Diane L. Wendlandt, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Criminal Appeals, Anchorage, and Jahna Lindemuth, Attorney General, Juneau, for the Appellee.
Judge Panel:Before: Mannheimer, Chief Judge, Allard, Judge, and Suddock, Superior Court Judge.
Case Date:November 21, 2018
Court:Court of Appeals of Alaska
 
FREE EXCERPT

JAMIE DON CORDELL, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF ALASKA, Appellee.

No. A-12272

Court of Appeals of Alaska

November 21, 2018

UNPUBLISHED See Alaska Appellate Rule 214(d)

Appeal from the Superior Court Trial Court No. 3AN-11-10053 CR, Third Judicial District, Anchorage, Kevin M. Saxby, Judge.

Megan R. Webb, Assistant Public Defender, and Quinlan Steiner, Public Defender, Anchorage, for the Appellant.

Diane L. Wendlandt, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Criminal Appeals, Anchorage, and Jahna Lindemuth, Attorney General, Juneau, for the Appellee.

Before: Mannheimer, Chief Judge, Allard, Judge, and Suddock, Superior Court Judge. [*]

MEMORANDUM OPINION

SUDDOCK JUDGE.

Jamie Don Cordell was charged with sexually abusing two of his daughters, as well as a friend of one of his daughters. Following a jury trial, Cordell was convicted of one count of first-degree and two counts of second-degree sexual abuse of a minor for abusing one of his daughters, but he was acquitted of abusing the two other children.

On appeal, Cordell claims that the superior court erred when it allowed the State to introduce, under Alaska Evidence Rule 404(b)(2), evidence that Cordell had acted in a sexually suggestive manner toward two other young girls. We conclude that the superior court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted this evidence.

Cordell also claims that the trial court erred when it allowed the State to introduce, as a prior inconsistent statement, an excerpt of the prosecutor's recorded pretrial interview with a defense expert witness. We agree that the superior court erred, but we conclude that the error was harmless.

Background

In July of 2011, Alaska State Troopers received a call from the mother of then twelve-year-old H.S. The mother claimed that Cordell had sexually assaulted H.S.

During an ensuing interview by a trooper, H.S. alleged that Cordell had sexually assaulted her while she was at a sleep-over with her friend S.C. (Cordell's daughter) at the home of S.Cs aunt. H.S. said that Cordell - who was the only adult in the house at the time - came into the room that H.S. was sharing with S.C, and then carried her into an adjacent bedroom. According to H.S., Cordell placed her on the bed and started to remove her clothing. He kissed her neck, chest, and stomach. H.S. was unable to push Cordell off of her.

H.S. further alleged that Cordell put his hand on her vagina and made her touch his penis. She said that Cordell threatened to kill her unless she cooperated, but that when she told Cordell that she was a virgin, he sent her back to her room. An Anchorage police detective, Kim Trujillo, later re-interviewed H.S., and H.S. repeated these allegations.

Detective Trujillo also interviewed Cordell's...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP