State v. Garretson

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtMark D. Pfeiffer, Judge
CitationState v. Garretson, 598 S.W.3d 643 (Mo. App. 2020)
Decision Date24 March 2020
Docket NumberWD 82404
Parties STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Shayne Lance GARRETSON, Appellant.

Eric S. Schmitt, Attorney General, and Justin Moody, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, Attorneys for Respondent.

Chris Rasmussen, Tuscumbia, MO, Attorney for Appellant.

Before Division One: Thomas N. Chapman, Presiding Judge, and Mark D. Pfeiffer and Anthony Rex Gabbert, Judges

Mark D. Pfeiffer, Judge

Mr. Shayne Garretson ("Garretson") appeals from the judgment entered by the Circuit Court of Moniteau County, Missouri ("trial court"), following a jury trial in which he was found guilty of one count of statutory rape, four counts of statutory sodomy, and five counts of incest. Garretson seeks plain error review of unpreserved evidentiary and opening statement claims of error on appeal. We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History1

Garretson (whose relationship to the victims was as a grandfather) was married to "Grandmother." They had a home in Sedalia, Pettis County, Missouri, as well as a lake house in Morgan County, Missouri. Garretson and Grandmother had three adult biological children, "Mother," "Uncle 1," and "Uncle 2." Mother had two biological daughters of her own, J.C. and K.M.2

Garretson sexually abused J.C. and K.M. at his home in Sedalia and at the lake house during the summers of 2014 and 2015.

J.C. testified that the first time Garretson did something inappropriate was at the house in Sedalia when she was nine years old. While clothed, Garretson touched her breasts and put her legs on his penis. Another time at the Sedalia house, he put his finger in her vagina, telling her, "This is what it feels like to have a baby." J.C. screamed and started crying because it "hurt really bad."

On two occasions when only Garretson and J.C. were at the lake house, Garretson put his fingers in her vagina. The first time, after he was done, she bled from her vagina, vomited, and soiled herself. She felt "shocked," "traumatized," and "really scared." She used a sanitary napkin and wore Grandmother’s underwear home. J.C. also bled the second time Garretson put his fingers in her vagina while at the lake house. She screamed and told him to stop. She asked him why he was doing this to her, and he replied, "God chose him."

Garretson would tell J.C. that he was taking her skating, shopping, or out to eat, but either instead of or after those activities, he would take her to the lake house. The sexual assaults at the lake house occurred in Garretson and Grandmother’s bedroom. He licked J.C.’s vagina at the lake house multiple times. He would rub his penis on or inside her vagina. Sometimes he would put a lubricant in her vagina. Garretson told J.C. not to tell anyone because "bad things would happen or something else."

K.M.’s first sexual encounter with Garretson was in the bedroom of the Sedalia house when she was eight years old. She woke up and Garretson was licking and putting his finger in her vagina. She screamed and yelled for help. Uncle 1 came to the bedroom door and knocked. Garretson went to the door and cracked it a little bit so he could see Uncle 1. Uncle 1 asked what was going on, and Garretson told him that the television was turned up. Another time at Garretson’s house in Sedalia, K.M. saw J.C. go into Garretson’s bedroom with him. The door was locked, and K.M. sat outside on the stairs, listening in case she heard screams. When J.C. came out of the bedroom, K.M. asked her if Garretson had been "doing anything" to her. J.C. asked why, and K.M. told her that Garretson had been molesting her. J.C. told K.M. that Garretson had been molesting her too.

Garretson also sexually assaulted K.M. at the lake house. Multiple times, Garretson licked K.M.’s vagina. He also put his fingers in her vagina multiple times, and a couple of times he rubbed his penis on her vagina. Another time Garretson attached handcuffs to K.M.’s ankles and the bed frame to restrain her so she could not close her legs. Once when J.C. and K.M. were together at the lake house alone with Garretson, J.C. and K.M. took shifts sleeping and staying up during the night "so that he wouldn't come and get one of us." On one occasion when Garretson was driving J.C. and K.M. to the lake house after skating, they cried and told him to take them home. When asked why, K.M. yelled, "Because you're going to rape us!" Garretson told K.M. not to tell anyone because "[y]our mom will get hurt."

On September 25, 2015, Garretson was planning to visit Uncle 1 in Colorado. He wanted to take eleven-year-old J.C. and nine-year-old K.M. with him. Mother called J.C. and K.M.’s schools to arrange for Garretson to pick them up. When J.C. received a note from the school office that she was going to be a car rider instead of a bus rider and that her grandfather was going to pick her up, J.C. went to the counselor’s office and called Mother. She told Mother that she wanted to ride the bus home and did not want to go to Colorado with Garretson.

When J.C. arrived home from school, Mother asked her why she and K.M. all of a sudden did not want anything to do with Garretson. J.C. told Mother, "every time we go with Papa he tries to rape us." J.C. further explained that Garretson had been raping her and K.M. Mother immediately called her mother, Grandmother, and asked her to intercept Garretson, who had picked up K.M. at school. When Garretson and K.M. arrived at Mother’s house, Grandmother was waiting for them, and she immediately took K.M. to meet Mother and J.C. J.C. told K.M. that she had told Mother what had happened with Garretson. K.M. then also confirmed to Mother that Garretson had touched her "private."

Mother reported J.C. and K.M.’s disclosures to law enforcement. On September 30, 2015, J.C. and K.M. were interviewed at Child Safe of Central Missouri in Sedalia. J.C. was emotional as she related multiple incidents of Garretson sexually assaulting her. K.M. also spoke to the interviewer about Garretson’s abuse.

On October 6, 2015, Garretson’s case file was referred by Pettis County to the Morgan County Sheriff’s Department. On October 14, 2015, Garretson was present when a search warrant for the lake house was executed. Garretson’s truck was searched, and in the toolbox officers found a bag with children’s underwear and a swimsuit top inside. J.C.’s DNA was on the underwear. In the search of the truck cab, officers found handcuffs, a handgun, and condoms. In the search of the lake house, officers found a black backpack with another set of handcuffs, Vaseline, a plastic tube, condoms, and nine firearms. Garretson was arrested on October 15, 2015.

Garretson posted bond and called Mother the next day to ask her to meet him. They went to a cemetery where he threatened to commit suicide. He told her, "I did not have sex with [J.C.]." But when Mother asked him how J.C. ended up bleeding, he stated that he "pushed his finger in too hard." When Garretson returned home from the cemetery, Garretson’s brother-in-law, R.B., was there. Garretson told R.B. that "there’s a demon in me."

On October 21, 2015, a child abuse and neglect pediatrician conducted sexual assault forensic examinations ("SAFE") of J.C. and K.M. at Children’s Mercy Hospital in Kansas City. Her diagnosis for both girls was sexual abuse.

Garretson was charged with the following offenses: (1) one count of statutory rape in the first degree for knowingly having sexual intercourse with J.C., a child less than twelve years old; (2) one count of the class D felony of incest for engaging in sexual intercourse with J.C., knowing she was his descendant by blood; (3) one count of statutory sodomy in the first degree for having deviate sexual intercourse with J.C., who was then less than twelve years old, by placing his finger in her vagina; (4) one count of the class D felony of incest for engaging in deviate sexual intercourse by placing his finger in her vagina, knowing she was his descendant by blood; (5) one count of statutory sodomy in the first degree for having deviate sexual intercourse with J.C., who was then less than twelve years old, by licking her vagina with his tongue; (6) one count of the class D felony of incest for engaging in deviate sexual intercourse by licking J.C.’s vagina, knowing she was his descendant by blood; (7) one count of the felony of statutory sodomy in the first degree for having deviate sexual intercourse with K.M., who was then less than twelve years old, by licking her vagina with his tongue; (8) one count of the class D felony of incest for engaging in deviate sexual intercourse by licking K.M.’s vagina, knowing she was his descendant by blood; (9) one count of the felony of statutory sodomy in the first degree, by having deviate sexual intercourse with K.M., who was then less than twelve years old, by placing his finger in her vagina; and (10) one count of the class D felony of incest for engaging in deviate sexual intercourse by placing his finger in K.M.’s vagina, knowing her to be his descendant by blood.

A jury trial was held September 11-13, 2018. Garretson testified in his own defense, denying all allegations against him. The jury found Garretson guilty of all ten counts. The trial court sentenced Garretson to thirty years’ imprisonment on the statutory rape charge and on each of the statutory sodomy charges and to four years’ imprisonment on each of the incest charges, with all sentences to run concurrently.

Garretson timely appealed.

I.

In Garretson’s first point on appeal, he asserts that the trial court erred in overruling his request for an acquittal at the close of the State’s opening statement.

Standard of Review

At trial, Garretson made a limited argument regarding the substance of the State’s opening statement as it related to some, but not all, of the counts with which Garretson had been charged. On appeal, Garretson changed his argument and broadened the scope of his objection to the State’s opening statement...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
7 cases
  • Garretson v. State
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • June 18, 2024
    ...with all sentences to run concurrently. Garretson’s convictions and sentences were affirmed on direct appeal. State v. Garretson, 598 S.W.3d 643 (Mo. App. W.D. 2020). We issued our mandate on May 20, 2020. Garretson timely filed a pro se Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief on July 3......
  • State v. Coyle
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • June 27, 2023
    ...tendency to commit the crime charged." State v. Jackson , 636 S.W.3d 908, 920 (Mo. App. W.D. 2021) (quoting State v. Garretson , 598 S.W.3d 643, 653 (Mo. App. W.D. 2020) ). However, when a defendant is charged with sexual offenses committed against children, article 1, section 18(c) of the ......
  • State v. Jones
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • November 9, 2021
    ...substantial grounds for believing that manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice has resulted.’ " Id. (quoting State v. Garretson , 598 S.W.3d 643, 649 (Mo. App. W.D. 2020) ). "In other words, the alleged plain error must be ‘evident, obvious, and clear.’ " Id. (quoting Garretson , 598 S......
  • State v. Jackson
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • December 21, 2021
    ...crimes, wrongs, or acts used to establish that [a] defendant has a natural tendency to commit the crime charged." State v. Garretson , 598 S.W.3d 643, 653 (Mo. App. W.D. 2020) (quoting State v. Boss , 577 S.W.3d 509, 519 (Mo. App. W.D. 2019) ). The general rule is that uncharged crimes, wro......
  • Get Started for Free
3 books & journal articles
  • §801 Definitions
    • United States
    • The Missouri Bar Practice Books Evidence Restated Deskbook Chapter 8 Hearsay
    • Invalid date
    ...banc 2012)—most of the recent decisions state that the admission of a party opponent is not hearsay at all. See: · State v. Garretson, 598 S.W.3d 643, 654–55 (Mo. App. E.D. 2020) · State v. Eisele, 414 S.W.3d 507, 514 (Mo. App. E.D. 2013) · State v. Floyd, 347 S.W.3d 115, 124 (Mo. App. E.D.......
  • Hearsay Exceptions
    • United States
    • The Missouri Bar Practice Books Objections Guidebook Part 1 OBJECTIONS
    • Invalid date
    ...621 S.W.3d 36 (Mo. App. W.D. 2021) (explanation of admissions of a party opponent and explanation of contradiction); State v. Garretson, 598 S.W.3d 643, 654–55 (Mo. App. W.D. 2020) (admission of a party opponent is not hearsay) (“[T]he admission of criminal defendant is not considered to be......
  • Hearsay
    • United States
    • The Missouri Bar Practice Books Objections Guidebook Part 1 OBJECTIONS
    • Invalid date
    ...bias and for impeachment). - State v. Basile, 942 S.W.2d 342, 356–57 (Mo. banc 1997) (statement to show knowledge); State v. Garretson, 598 S.W.3d 643, 654–55 (Mo. App. W.D. 2020) (the admissions of a criminal defendant to his brother-in-law— “there’s a demon in me”—are “excepted from the h......