Harville v. State, 8 Div. 339

Decision Date29 July 1980
Docket Number8 Div. 339
Citation386 So.2d 776
PartiesQuinton Dexter HARVILLE v. STATE.
CourtAlabama Court of Criminal Appeals

Donald R. White, Moulton, for appellant.

Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., Thomas R. Allison, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

HARRIS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was indicted for the first degree murder of his five year old daughter by causing her suffocation. A jury found appellant guilty of second degree murder and fixed his punishment at twenty years in the penitentiary. Appellant was properly arraigned in the presence of his attorney and interposed a plea of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity. The special plea of not guilty by reason of insanity was subsequently withdrawn. After sentence was imposed, appellant gave notice of appeal and was determined to be indigent. Appellant has been furnished a free transcript and his trial counsel was appointed to represent him on appeal.

The evidence was conflicting and as such presented questions for the jury to resolve. McBryar v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 368 So.2d 568, cert. denied, Ala., 368 So.2d 575; May v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 335 So.2d 242; Jones v. State, 54 Ala.App. 251, 307 So.2d 59.

Viewing the evidence presented by the prosecution in its most favorable light, as we are required, Bass v. State, 55 Ala.App. 88, 313 So.2d 208; Livingston v. State, 44 Ala.App. 559, 216 So.2d 731, we find the evidence sufficient to prove appellant's guilt beyond any reasonable doubt. The State's evidence clearly supports the jury's verdict.

Briefly, appellant and his wife took their five year old daughter, Denise, to the emergency room of the Lawrence County Hospital at approximately 7:25 p. m. on July 8, 1979. She was declared dead on arrival. Dr. Garland C. Hall, Jr. administered emergency resuscitation measures, but to no avail.

An autopsy later revealed that Denise's death was caused by "the aspiration of the stomach contents into the lungs." Dr. Joseph Haden Embry, who performed the autopsy, testified that several mechanisms could have produced the aspiration. After ruling out epilepsy and drugs in Denise's case, Dr. Embry testified that another "common cause of aspiration is asphyxia, which may be produced either by smothering or choking or anything that cuts off air from the outside." Dr. Embry gave his opinion that Denise "was probably smothered."

Just prior to the Harvilles' leaving for the hospital, Doris Nolen, a next door neighbor, testified that she heard appellant talking in a loud voice, that "he sounded like he was angry or mad or something." Approximately a week later, appellant came to Mrs. Nolen's house to use the telephone and told her "he might of did kill Denise, but if he did, it was an accident in getting her to the hospital." Appellant also told her "that them was his children to do with as he pleased, and nobody had any say-so over the kids, because they belonged to him."

Dennis Harville, Denise's twin brother, testified that he saw "Daddy put his hand over her mouth and make her die." Dennis stated that it happened in the bedroom of their house and that he rode with his parents carrying Denise to the hospital.

Mary Davis testified that she saw the Harvilles arrive at the emergency room with Denise. Dennis told her "that they were at his granny's, and Denise had cried for water. He said that after they went home Denise still was crying. And he said that Denise cried and cried. He said, 'Daddy put his hand over Denise's mouth until Denise didn't cry any more.' " Mrs. Davis further stated that she "could smell whiskey real bad" on appellant.

Mrs. Floy LouAllen also testified that she talked with Dennis at the hospital when Denise was brought in. "Dennis said that she was crying, and that him placed him did this. (Indicating) He put his hands over her mouth. And he said that her went like this, . . . and he dropped his head to his shoulders and closed his eyes. . . . And he said that mama tried to give her a drink of water and her wouldn't take it." Mrs. LouAllen stated that the odor of alcohol was strong on appellant and that she heard him say, "Blame me, it's all my fault."

E. D. Montgomery, a cell-mate of appellant's in the Lawrence County Jail, testified appellant told him in conversation that "he killed his baby."

Robert Wingo, another cell-mate of appellant's, testified: "We never had any open conversation about it, but one night Quinton had made a statement that he placed his hand over the child's mouth to keep it from crying. . . . And he went on to say that all he did was put his hand over the child's mouth to keep it quiet."

Mrs. Melvie Stout testified that she overheard a conversation between appellant and his sister at the funeral home. "I was seated across from them, and Quinton came into the room and he knelt stooped down to Earlene, and he said, 'They are wanting to talk to me.' . . . 'What am I going to say?' and she said, 'You are going to say what you said you were going to, that you were in the yard. . . . ' "

After the State rested and appellant's motion to exclude the State's evidence was overruled, appellant presented the following testimony. Fred Harville, appellant's father, testified that Denise had been complaining with a stomach ache and that he heard Denise crying before "they left out and went to the doctor." The essence of Mr. Harville's testimony was "I didn't even speak to them any more after they left out of my house there. I didn't know what got wrong with her in there." Mr. Harville stated his son "wouldn't have killed her."

Dr. Willard Irwin testified that he had treated Dennis Harville for a respiratory infection on May 12, 1979, and that he had last treated Denise Harville for a respiratory infection in February of 1975.

Appellant testified in his own behalf that, while his wife, Annette, was cooking supper for Dennis and Denise, he had stepped outside to roll up the car windows and to use the bathroom. He heard Annette holler, "Quinton, something is wrong with Denise." Appellant stated that he ran into the house and Annette had Denise in her arms. "(S)he said she couldn't get her mouth open, and so I had to take my finger and prize her mouth open." It was appellant's story that, after they failed to revive Denise, "We got in the car and took her to the hospital." Appellant denied harming his child in any way. Annette Harville's testimony was substantially similar to her husband's.

The State presented additional evidence on rebuttal, which, again, was in direct conflict with appellant's version.

Prior to the reception of any evidence, and in accordance with Ala.Code § 12-21-165 (1975), the trial court conducted a hearing on appellant's motion to suppress the testimony of five year old Dennis Harville. It is alleged by appellant that Dennis could not understand the nature of an oath and was therefore incompetent to be a witness.

Omitting a number of preliminary questions which the trial judge asked Dennis, we quote from the record:

"THE COURT: All right. Dennis, do you know what it means to tell the truth?

THE WITNESS: Uh-huh.

THE COURT: Can you tell the truth?

THE WITNESS: Uh-huh.

THE COURT: Do you know what it means to tell a lie?

THE WITNESS: Uh-huh.

THE COURT: Which is the best, to tell the truth or to tell a lie?

THE WITNESS: To tell the truth.

THE COURT: Do you know what happens to little boys that don't tell the truth?

THE WITNESS: What?

THE COURT: I am asking you; do you know what happens to you? What happens to you when you tell a story?

THE WITNESS: I am fibbing and fibbing.

THE COURT: You are fibbing?

THE WITNESS: Uh-huh.

THE COURT: What happens to you if you fib?

THE WITNESS: I am going to have to tell the truth and not tell a lie.

THE COURT: You are going to what?

THE WITNESS: I am going to have to tell the truth. When you tell a lie, you are going to have to start over and tell the truth.

THE COURT: In other words, do you tell the truth all the time?

THE WITNESS: Uh-huh.

THE COURT: Okay. Do you know what this hearing is about, Dennis?

THE WITNESS: Uh-huh.

THE COURT: What is it about?

THE WITNESS: It's about telling the truth and not telling a lie.

THE COURT: About telling the truth?

THE WITNESS: Uh-huh, and not telling a lie.

THE COURT: All right. Do you always tell the truth?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

THE COURT: Okay. Have you been sick recently?

THE WITNESS: I was sick.

THE COURT: When were you sick?

THE WITNESS: One time when I was at my house and I was with my mama and I got sick and I went to the hospital.

THE COURT: You were up at your house and you got sick?

THE WITNESS: Uh-huh.

THE COURT: That was before you started going to Mrs. Betty's, wasn't it?

THE WITNESS: Uh-huh.

THE COURT: All right.

THE WITNESS: Before Richard Walker came and picked me up.

THE COURT: Before Richard Walker came and picked you up?

THE WITNESS: Uh-huh.

THE COURT: Are you six years old now?

THE WITNESS: No, I am still five.

THE COURT: When will you be six?

THE WITNESS: When I get big I will be six years old.

THE COURT: All right. (To Mr. Littrell) What does the record show his birthday is?

MR. LITTRELL: July the 1st, 1974.

THE COURT: So he was six July the first?

MR. LITTRELL: No, five.

THE COURT: Five?

MR. WHITE: Uh-huh.

THE COURT: All right. I don't have any other questions concerning him. Dennis, who is your Sunday School Teacher, son?

THE WITNESS: Mr. Beaty.

THE COURT: Miss Betty?

THE WITNESS: No, Mr. Beaty at the church teaches me.

THE COURT: All right. (To Mr. White) Do you have any other offering you want to make?

MR. WHITE: No, except to renew our Motion to Suppress. He has shown no knowledge of God, and that God awards for the truth and avenges for falsehood. He has no comprehension of the solemnity of the oath, and simply

THE COURT: Okay. Dennis, do you know what it means to tell the truth?

(NO ANSWER FROM THE WITNESS)

THE COURT: Do you know what it means to swear to tell the truth and to take an oath?

THE WITNESS: Uh-huh.

THE COURT: What do you do when you swear to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Jackson v. State, 4 Div. 968
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • May 18, 1982
    ...857 (1950); Puckett v. State, 213 Ala. 383, 105 So. 211 (1925); Crenshaw v. State, 205 Ala. 256, 87 So. 328 (1921); Harville v. State, 386 So.2d 776 (Ala.Cr.App.1980); Roberson v. State, 384 So.2d 864 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 384 So.2d 868 (Ala.1980); Pennington v. State, 57 Ala.App. 65......
  • Scott v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • October 5, 2012
    ...in the exciting occurrence.” C. Gamble and R. Goodwin, McElroy's Alabama Evidence § 265.01(8) (6th ed 2009). See Harville v. State, 386 So.2d 776 (Ala.Crim.App.1980) ; Bass v. State, 375 So.2d 540 (Ala.Crim.App.1979). The Alabama Supreme Court in Ex parte C.L.Y., 928 So.2d 1069 (Ala.2005), ......
  • Burkett v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • May 31, 1983
    ...victim's incompetency. Roberson v. State, 384 So.2d 864 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 384 So.2d 868 (Ala.1980). See also Harville v. State, 386 So.2d 776 (Ala.Cr.App.1980). Consequently, we find no error in the trial court allowing the victim to testify or in denying appellant's motion to st......
  • Coleman v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • November 1, 1983
    ...such an examination of the infant witness and was convinced of her competency to testify. As this court recognized in Harville v. State, 386 So.2d 776 (Ala.Cr.App.1980), the determination of a child's qualification to take a witness's oath is necessarily vested in the sound discretion of th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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