State v. Crabtree

Decision Date06 September 2016
Docket NumberNo. COA15–1124,COA15–1124
Citation790 S.E.2d 709,249 N.C.App. 395
Parties STATE of North Carolina v. William Clifton CRABTREE, Sr.
CourtNorth Carolina Court of Appeals

Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Natalie Whiteman Bacon, for the State.

Mark Montgomery for Defendant.

STEPHENS, Judge.

Defendant William Clifton Crabtree, Sr., appeals from judgments entered upon his convictions for first-degree sexual offense against a child under the age of thirteen years, indecent liberties with a child, and crime against nature. Crabtree argues that the trial court plainly erred by (1) allowing three witnesses to vouch for the child victim's credibility and (2) submitting the first-degree sexual offense charge to the jury on a theory not supported by the evidence. While we agree that one of the State's witnesses impermissibly vouched for the victim's credibility, we conclude that this error did not prejudice Crabtree. We find no error in the trial court's submission of the first-degree sexual offense charge.

Factual and Procedural Background

The evidence at trial tended to show the following: In late April 2013, ten-year-old "L.R."1 and her two brothers began living with her grandmother and Crabtree, the grandmother's husband of sixteen years. L.R. testified that, shortly thereafter, Crabtree, whom L.R. considered her "grandpa," began making sexual advances towards her, starting with an incident in the family's barn when Crabtree kissed L.R., inserted his tongue into her mouth, and touched her breasts. Crabtree progressed to entering her room at night to "rub his thing on" her. L.R. testified that Crabtree "rubbed his dick on my vagina and white stuff was coming out[.]" Sometimes Crabtree made L.R. put her hand on his "thing" and move it up and down. Crabtree touched the inside of L.R.’s vagina using his fingers and moving them "up and down." L.R. testified that it hurt when Crabtree's fingernails would poke her vagina and she had itching on the inside of her vagina. Crabtree also licked L.R.’s vagina.

L.R. testified that this sexual abuse took place when she was home sick from school and her grandmother was at work and also on a morning following Thanksgiving. L.R. explained that, on the latter occasion, her grandmother had awakened, come to L.R.’s bedroom door, and witnessed Crabtree abusing L.R. In that incident, Crabtree used his hand to rub her vagina and then "he started licking it." According to L.R., Crabtree threatened her with foster care if she told anyone about his abuse.

"D.J.," L.R.’s younger brother, who, like his sister, had known Crabtree as his "grandpa" for his entire life, testified about several instances when he saw Crabtree "do things with [L.R.] that [D.J.] thought [were] weird or strange or inappropriate[.]" D.J. testified that he witnessed Crabtree "lift up her skirt, her nightgown" while they were seated at "the eating table." On another occasion, in the family barn, D.J. saw Crabtree "do something that [he] thought was wrong to" L.R., to wit, Crabtree "had his hand in her pants." The third incident D.J. witnessed took place in L.R.’s bedroom:

A. I saw him sitting on the edge of the bed. [L.R.] was between his legs. I didn't know what he was doing, but I did see that.
Q. Did you know at this time what anybody was wearing when you saw that?
A. Um, I think he was wearing his underwear, and she was wearing[ ] her purple nightgown.
Q. Could you see anybody's body parts?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Could you see any private parts of anybody?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Okay. Now, when you saw those things that you thought were weird and wrong, did you say anything about it to anybody?
A. I told my grandma.
Q. When did you tell your grandma?
A. Like the first time I saw it, I told her.
Q. Okay. What did you say?
A. That, um, I think something like that, um, he was messing with [L.R.].

The grandmother testified that, on 29 November 2013, she awoke to find Crabtree was not in their shared bedroom. Looking for her husband, she walked through the house to the doorway of L.R.’s bedroom and saw Crabtree sitting on the side of L.R.’s bed with his hands between L.R.’s legs and L.R.’s hands between his legs. According to the grandmother, "[t]hey was feeling each other up[ ]" and there was no doubt in her mind that the contact was sexual in nature. The grandmother motioned for L.R. to remain quiet by placing her finger over her mouth because the grandmother wanted to "see what all he was going to do." The grandmother then quietly retreated to her bedroom, unnoticed by Crabtree, but later returned to L.R.’s bedroom and asked Crabtree what he was doing. Crabtree replied that he was "looking for a mouse." After Crabtree left the room, the grandmother spoke with L.R. about what she had just seen, and L.R. disclosed her past sexual abuse by Crabtree. The grandmother did not confront Crabtree, instead contacting the Person County Department of Social Services ("DSS") and local law enforcement.

Several witnesses testified about the investigation into L.R.’s allegations. Later in December, the grandmother took L.R. to the emergency room ("ER") after she complained of pain and itching in her vaginal area and stated that Crabtree had engaged in intercourse with her. An ER doctor alerted the Child Abuse Medical Evaluation Clinic, an outpatient clinic affiliated with Duke University Hospital, and, on 23 December 2013, Dr. Karen Sue St. Claire, a pediatrician and the medical director of the clinic, began an evaluation of L.R. St. Claire testified as an expert witness. During her initial exam of L.R., St. Claire received L.R.’s medical history from the grandmother while Scott Snyder, St. Claire's child interviewer, interviewed L.R. about the alleged abuse. St. Claire's physical examination of L.R. revealed no physical signs of trauma or infection to L.R.’s vagina or anal area.

St. Claire testified about the clinic's five-tier rating system for evaluating an alleged child victim's description of sexual abuse. St. Claire and Snyder each classified L.R.’s description as level five, the "most diagnostic" category. St. Claire testified that L.R.’s description provided a "clear disclosure" and a "clear indication" of sexual abuse. Snyder was not formally offered or accepted as an expert witness, but offered testimony about his interviews with L.R. Pertinent to this appeal, when asked on re-direct examination about L.R.’s report of a detail regarding an incident of fellatio L.R. was forced to perform on Crabtree, Snyder testified as follows:

Q Is that correct? Was it remarkable to you when she described the juice hitting the roof of her mouth?
A Umm, remarkable in terms of not typically something that you would hear from a ten-year-old child, and not necessarily something, again trying to understand what may be the reason the child might be saying these things. It is striking in terms of what the child may have seen something happen, but that's more of a experiential statement, in other words something may have actually happened to her as opposed to something seeing on a screen or something having been heard about.

DSS social worker Antoinetta Royster received L.R.’s case in early December 2013 and subsequently interviewed L.R., her family members, and Crabtree. Like Snyder, Royster was neither formally offered nor admitted as an expert witness. Royster testified about her interviews and then was asked about the process DSS follows in abuse and neglect cases:

Umm, the family had based upon the recommendations from the CME, the Child Medical Evaluation, one other evaluation was recommended, and that's called a Child Family Evaluation. And with those, it's a lot of times in the abuse and serious neglect cases where the Child Medical Evaluation look[s] more at the physical, but could be physical evidence of abuse and neglect, the Child Family Evaluation look[s] more at the emotional piece of it to basically talk with everyone in the family. And if there is any other thing, any other treatment is needed, they would recommend that to DSS for us to like move on with that, move forward in that direction. They ... also give what they, not really a diagnosis, but their conclusion or decision about those children that have been evaluated if they were abused or neglected in any way.
Q So and all of those recommendations and treatments have been followed up on—
A Yes.
Q—as you continue to be involved in this case. Is that correct?
A Yes.

Captain A.J. Weaver of the Person County Sheriff's Office also testified on behalf of the State. Weaver testified about his recorded interview with L.R. on 4 December 2013. The recorded interview was introduced into evidence as State's Exhibit 3, published, and played for the jury without objection. In the recording, which was transcribed by the court reporter when it was played for the jury at trial, L.R. disclosed that Crabtree had touched her "private area" with his hands and forced L.R. to "rub" his "private." L.R. also described Crabtree pulling her pants down and licking her "private." L.R. further explained that, after playing with her "private," Crabtree would put his "private" in L.R.’s mouth, go "up and down" until "stuff start[ed] coming out" and went into L.R.’s mouth. L.R. said the latter form of abuse had happened two or three times. Weaver testified that, following his interview with L.R., he sought warrants and arrested Crabtree on 4 December 2013.

On 9 December 2013, a Person County Grand Jury indicted Crabtree on three charges based on the events alleged to have occurred on 29 November 2013: one count of first-degree sex offense against a child under the age of thirteen years, one count of indecent liberties with a child, and one count of crime against nature. Crabtree pled not guilty, and his case came on for trial at the 16 March 2015 session of Person County Superior Court, the Honorable Beecher R. Gray, Judge presiding. Following the close of the State's evidence,2 Crabtree elected not to present any...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • State v. Martinez
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • May 16, 2017
    ...supported by the evidence." State v. Jordan , 186 N.C.App. 576, 584, 651 S.E.2d 917, 922 (2007). See also State v. Crabtree , ––– N.C. App. ––––, ––––, 790 S.E.2d 709, 717 (2016).In our first opinion, we essentially concluded that the trial court's disjunctive instruction constituted plain ......
  • State v. Betts
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • September 3, 2019
    ...amounts to an evaluation of the veracity of the child witness and is, therefore, impermissible testimony." State v. Crabtree , ––– N.C. App. ––––, ––––, 790 S.E.2d 709, 714 (2016), review on additional issues denied , appeal dismissed , 369 N.C. 195, 793 S.E.2d 687 (2016), and aff'd , 370 N......
  • State v. Garcia
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • April 20, 2021
    ...qualified as an expert witness, the jury will most likely give her opinion more weight than a lay opinion." State v. Crabtree , 249 N.C. App. 395, 402, 790 S.E.2d 709, 714 (2016), aff'd , 370 N.C. 156, 804 S.E.2d 183 (2017) ; see also N.C. Gen. Stat. § 8C-1, Rule 701 (lay-witness "testimony......
  • State v. Robinson
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • December 31, 2020
    ...to this case. In State v. Crabtree the expert witness expressed an opinion on whether sexual abuse occurred. 249 N.C. App. 395, 402-03, 790 S.E.2d 709, 715 (2016), aff'd , 370 N.C. 156, 804 S.E.2d 183 (2017) ("In contrast, St. Claire's testimony did include impermissible vouching. We find n......
  • 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