Eide v. State
| Decision Date | 18 June 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. F--75--371,F--75--371 |
| Citation | 551 P.2d 275 |
| Parties | Kenneth EIDE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
Appellant, Kenneth Eide, hereinafter referred to as defendant, was charged, tried and convicted in the District Court, Carter County, Case No. CRF--75--37, for the offense of Lewd Molestation, in violation of 21 O.S.1971, § 1123. Jury trial being waived, the trial court fixed his punishment at fifteen (15) years' imprisonment and from said judgment and sentence an appeal has been perfected to this Court.
At the trial the testimony of the six year old alleged victim, who was five years of age on the date of the offense, was that defendant called her to a room of a small building one evening while she was playing with his step-children. Defendant there removed her clothes and had her lay on a sheet spread upon the floor. Defendant laid on top of her while moving against her body with his penis between her legs and then apparently ejaculated with his penis in her mouth. The child subsequently spit the semen from her mouth in a nearby bathroom. Her testimony further indicated that she suffered some injury while being molested. Although defendant threatened to kill her if she reported the incident to anyone, the child informed her mother that same evening as well as the authorities and Dr. Mannerburg.
Don Mannerburg, M.D., next testified that at about 10:30 p.m. on March 22, 1975, he examined the alleged victim who he found initially to be quite upset. Upon inquiry to determine the nature of an appropriate examination, the child related that she had been sexually molested and the manner of the assault. The examination revealed very recent injuries, as follows: hemorrhage under the skin in the corners of the mouth; a bruise about four inches square upon the left lower abdomen and inguinal area, or where the leg joins onto the trunk of the body at the front; a great deal of redness and irritation or chafing around the inner thighs and perineum, or the area outside the vagina.
The mother of the alleged victim then testified that defendant had been doing some carpentry work at her home on March 22, 1975, and when he quit at about 4:00 p.m. her daughter and another child went to defendant's home to play with other children there. The witness had been invited to the home of defendant and his wife for supper that evening and arrived there shortly before 6:00 p.m. Upon leaving their home about one-half hour later, her daughter was disturbed and related that she had been molested and threatened by defendant. After subsequently returning to defendant's home and informing him of her intentions, the witness reported the incident to authorities that same evening.
Wayne Warthen, an investigator for the office of the District Attorney, next testified and described the alleged victim as being emotionally upset when he interviewed her at the police station on the evening of March 22, 1975. As a result of that discussion, the witness questioned the forty-one year old defendant later that evening at the police station after advising him of his rights, and defendant denied the subject charges.
Bill Culley, Assistant Chief of Police for the Ardmore Police Department, then testified as the final witness for the State, that defendant was found in a small building to the rear of his home on the night of March 22, 1975, and then stated that he had been expecting the officers.
Louise Eide, a former wife of the defendant, first testified for the defense that she visited in defendant's home from about 3:00 to 6:30 p.m. on March 22, 1975. Her testimony in direct examination tended to establish that defendant was within her presence during this period and did not enter the small building at the rear of the home with the alleged victim. However, in cross-examination she testified that she did not devote close attention to the small building, and before having supper she and defendant's wife went to the store for twenty to twenty-five minutes leaving defendant alone with the children.
In testifying as the final witness in his behalf, defendant denied molesting the alleged victim and being alone with the child, but otherwise generally acknowledged the previously described circumstances surrounding the offense. Defendant explained that the small building in which the assault purportedly occurred was used as a bedroom where he and his wife slept upon sleeping bags since both suffered from problems with their backs. Contrary to the testimony of the previous defense witness, defendant denied being left alone with the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Glidewell v. State
...in a reasonably competent manner sufficient to meet our standards in Johnson v. State, 620 P.2d 1311 (Okl.Cr.1980), or in Eide v. State, 551 P.2d 275 (Okl.Cr.1976). This assignment of error is without Having addressed the appellant's assignments of error which pertain to the first stage of ......
-
Bowen v. State, F-78-465
...these allegations. Rather it appears that the court-appointed counsel vigorously and capably represented the defendant. In Eide v. State, Okl.Cr., 551 P.2d 275 (1976), we "We have repeatedly held that relief upon the ground of ineffective counsel will be granted only when the trial is a far......
-
Martin v. State
...participant in sex crimes does not require corroboration. See generally Yates v. State, 620 P.2d 413 (Okl.Cr.1980); Eide v. State, 551 P.2d 275 (Okl.Cr.1976); Sier v. State, 517 P.2d 803 (Okl.Cr.1973). Further, we reaffirm, and so hold here, that a child of tender years cannot, as a matter ......
-
Hill v. State, F-76-953
...of counsel at his trial. The standard for measuring the adequacy of counsel in Oklahoma was recently stated in Eide v. State, Okl.Cr., 551 P.2d 275 (1976), where we "We have repeatedly held that relief upon the ground of ineffective counsel will be granted only when the trial is a farce, mo......