Pridemore v. State, No. 4D19-1555
| Decision Date | 05 August 2020 |
| Docket Number | No. 4D19-1555 |
| Citation | 301 So.3d 454 |
| Parties | Jackson PRIDEMORE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Breanna Atwood, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allan R. Geesey, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Jackson Pridemore appeals his conviction for one count of sexual battery on a person less than 12 years of age. We affirm the conviction and write primarily to address Pridemore's claims that the trial court improperly (1) admitted evidence of a collateral crime into evidence and (2) allowed the state to publish a suicide note authored by the victim in the case.
The charges arose from the state's contention that Pridemore sexually abused his then-girlfriend's daughter ("the victim"), over the course of several years when the girl was between the ages of 7 and 11.
Prior to trial, the state filed notices of intent to offer child hearsay evidence and Williams1 rule evidence at trial. Regarding the child hearsay evidence, the state sought to introduce a handwritten suicide note written by the victim, in which she disclosed that Pridemore sexually abused her. As for the Williams rule evidence, the state sought to introduce the testimony of a prior victim, who said that Pridemore molested her when he was in a dating relationship with her mother.2
The trial court held a four-day hearing on the state's motions. The following facts emerged at the hearing.
The victim's stepmother (the "stepmother") testified that the victim had been living with her, the victim's father, and the victim's sister for three years, since June 2016. Prior to that, the victim lived with her mother.
In early 2017, when the victim was twelve years old, the stepmother noticed that she was acting out and getting into trouble, which was unusual. Curious about the victim's behavior, the stepmother examined her room and discovered a suicide note in a binder underneath her bed. The suicide note was not addressed to anyone, but it had names and notes underneath it. The stepmother testified that the suicide note seemed "very familiar," explaining that the victim had just watched 13 Reasons Why , a Netflix series about a girl who killed herself and made tape recordings addressed to different people.
Concerned that the victim was going to kill herself, the stepmother discussed the suicide note with her. The victim told her that it was not a suicide note and that it was more like a diary to allow her to express her feelings. The stepmother returned the note to the victim.
About a month and a half later, the stepmother went through the victim's room a second time and discovered the same suicide note sticking out of the binder, but this time more had been added to the note. These additions said that a crime had been committed against the victim. The note stated in pertinent part:
The victim was at her mother's house at the time, so the stepmother went there to discuss the note. The two women showed the victim the letter. The victim had a complete breakdown; she cried uncontrollably and tried to hide her face. The stepmother asked the victim "[i]f it was true," and the girl said, "Yes."
A counselor at a child advocacy center interviewed the victim in June 2017. During the interview, the victim detailed how Pridemore had raped her approximately seven times over a three- to four-year period, beginning when she was seven years old, at a time when Pridemore was dating her mother.
The prior victim's mother dated Pridemore before he began his relationship with the victim's mother. At one point, he lived with the mother and the prior victim. In March 2013, several years after the mother and Pridemore had broken up, the prior victim, then eleven years old, told her mother that "[Pridemore] touched me." Her mother asked the prior victim, "what do you mean he touched you?" The prior victim was crying and told her that Pridemore "pulled her pants down touched her [private] and then pulled them back up." When she asked the prior victim "how long," the prior victim said it had "been about a year" before she had reported it to her, explaining that she was afraid to tell her. The prior victim's mother confirmed that she was over the relationship at that point and did not make up the allegation to get back at Pridemore for breaking up with her.
A woman who works for a child protection team testified that she interviewed the prior victim in 2013. A DVD of her recorded interview was admitted into evidence. During this interview, the prior victim disclosed that Pridemore had pulled her underwear down and touched her vagina.
The prior victim told the team member that on the night of the incident, there was a birthday party at her house. Her mom told her to go upstairs and go to bed. The prior victim went upstairs to the bedroom she shared with her mother and laid down to watch TV. About thirty minutes later, Pridemore walked into the room and she could hear him washing his hands. She pretended that she was asleep, but was squinting so she could see what he was doing. Pridemore walked over to the bed and said her name softly a few times to see if she was asleep and waved his hand in front of her. He then walked over to the edge of the bed, pulled the blankets off of her, pulled her underwear down, and then touched her on the outside of her vagina. He did not touch her anywhere else. Pridemore washed his hands again and then left the room. Everyone was downstairs when this happened.
The trial court ruled that the suicide note was admissible. The court observed that: (1) it was something the victim wrote on her own and hid from her stepmother, intending it to be a suicide note in which she described Pridemore's molestation of her; (2) it was spontaneous and specific, not the product of improper influence; and (3) there was no motive to fabricate.
The trial court ruled that the prior victim's testimony was established by clear and convincing evidence and admissible under section 90.404(2)(b). The court noted that the prior victim spontaneously reported the incident to her mother, without any motive to fabricate and with no improper influence. The court referred to the differences between the allegations of the two girls—a one-time touching versus sexual intercourse over a period of several years—but focused on the similarities between the two victims. Both children were prepubescent females, the incidents were sequential in nature, not remote in time, and all occurred in their mothers' respective bedrooms, when Pridemore was alone with the child, taking advantage of his position of trust. Both incidents involved "vaginal touching either by a penis or a finger." The court discussed how Pridemore gained access to the girls by virtue of his dating relationship with each of their mothers. The court limited the collateral evidence at trial to the prior victim's testimony alone, so the prior incident did not become a feature of the trial.
At trial, the State's witnesses were the victim, the victim's stepmother, and the prior victim. A Boynton Beach detective interviewed Pridemore at the police station. He did not admit to sexually assaulting the victim.
Pridemore testified at trial. He said that the victim's mother lived in the same neighborhood where the prior victim's mother resided, until she moved. He denied inappropriately touching the victim or having sex with her.
The jury found Pridemore guilty as charged.
The prior victim's testimony was properly admitted pursuant to section 90.404(2)(b), Florida Statutes
For years, the admissibility of other crimes, wrongs, or acts was evaluated under section 90.404(2)(a), Florida Statutes, which provides:
Similar fact evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible when relevant to prove a material fact in issue, including, but not limited to, proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, but it is inadmissible when the evidence is relevant solely to prove bad character or propensity.
This section "restate[d] the Florida law as determined by Williams v. State ," 110 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 1959). Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida Evidence § 404.9 (2012 ed.). In 2001, the Legislature added section 90.404(2)(b) 1., which specifically...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Baker v. Dixon
... ... See ... generally id ... On ... April 13, 2012, the State filed a new Information in Case No ... 12-5496CF10A, which superseded the original ... identity, or absence of mistake or accident[.]” ... Pridemore v. State , 301 So.3d 454, 458-59 (Fla. 4th ... DCA 2020) (quoting Fla. Stat. § ... ...
-
Reyna v. State
...where collateral crime evidence under section 90.404(2)(b) is a common prosecutorial tool. See Pridemore v. State , No. 4D19-1555, 301 So.3d 454 (Fla. 4th DCA Aug. 5, 2020). The law requires greater similarity under 90.404(2)(c) than in child molestation cases because the adult cases can in......
-
Burgess v. State
...between means of access while requiring less commonality between the charged offense and the collateral crime. Pridemore v. State , 301 So. 3d 454, 460 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020) (upholding admission of collateral-crime evidence where the means of access between the collateral crime and present cr......
- Leibner v. Seider
-
Evidence
...propensity” of the defendant, but is used to show motive, intent, knowledge, modus operandi, or lack of mistake. Pridemore v. State, 301 So. 3d 454 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020) In extortion case, doctor met defendant on ashleymadison.com and had an extramarital sexual liaison with her. She then exto......