State v. Ridley
| Decision Date | 29 December 2022 |
| Docket Number | 2021AP1468-CR |
| Parties | State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Charles Rip Ridley, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Wisconsin Court of Appeals |
This opinion will not be published. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.23(1)(b)5.
APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Douglas County: No 2020CF73, GEORGE L. GLONEK, Judge. Affirmed.
Before Stark, P.J., Hruz and Gill, JJ.
Per curiam opinions may not be cited in any court of this state as precedent or authority, except for the limited purposes specified in Wis.Stat. Rule 809.23(3).
¶1 Charles Rip Ridley appeals from a judgment of conviction following a jury trial, for second-degree sexual assault with use of force, aggravated battery with intent to cause great bodily harm, false imprisonment, and first-degree recklessly endangering safety, all as a domestic abuse repeater and with a domestic abuse enhancer. At trial, Ridley moved for a mistrial after an inadmissible photograph was momentarily published to the jury and the victim testified that Ridley had previously choked her, which violated the circuit court's previous ruling on other-acts evidence. The court denied Ridley's motion.
¶2 Ridley makes three arguments on appeal: (1) the circuit court erred by failing to strike a prospective juror for cause based on the juror's subjective bias; (2) the court erred by denying Ridley's motion for a mistrial; and (3) in addition to the above-mentioned violation of the court's other-acts ruling, the victim's reference to Ridley's previous incarceration also violated the court's ruling on other-acts evidence and was prejudicial. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
¶3 On February 9, 2020, police responded to a report of a battery in Superior, Wisconsin. When police arrived, they found Carol[1] "naked on the floor covered by a blanket in the kitchen" of a home. According to police Carol "was visibly shaking, crying, and at times having a hard time breathing" and "her eyes appeared to be 'terrified.'" When asked what had happened Carol reported that Ridley, whom she had been in a romantic relationship with, had "abducted her from St. Paul, [Minnesota,]" "had been holding her captive inside [Ridley's daughter's nearby apartment] for over a week[,] and had been starving" and otherwise abusing her both sexually and physically.
¶4 According to Carol, during the week that she and Ridley were at Ridley's daughter's apartment, they had been using methamphetamine, and, at some point, Ridley's behavior toward her changed.[2] In one incident, Ridley became jealous because he had seen a "guy looking at [Carol]," and when she would not "come clean" after denying this happened, Ridley began punching her in the face. Ridley became physical with Carol again after she "refused to do hot rails[3] with him." At trial, Carol explained that Ridley hit her with a hammer "all over" her body, including her hips, knees, and back. According to Carol, "after [Ridley] was beating me with that hammer, he started saying, 'your family will not recognize you the next time they see you.'" She also testified that Ridley threatened her with a knife.[4] Carol explained that Ridley "kept telling [her] he was going to kill [her]" and "told [her] that [she] was about to die."
¶5 Ridley also initiated unwanted sexual intercourse with Carol, including oral, anal, and vaginal intercourse. Carol testified that Ridley "pretty much just does whatever he wants to do however he ever wants to do it for as long as he wants to do it." She explained that she "could not tell him no" because "that would've been like death in itself" and she According to Carol, she did not engage in sexual intercourse with Ridley "because [she] wanted to" but did so "because [she was] afraid."
¶6 Ultimately, Carol escaped from Ridley by jumping naked out of a second story window into a snowbank. Carol testified that just before she escaped, Ridley moved her to a different room in the apartment because Ridley's daughter told him that her neighbors were "complaining" and were "concerned" due to the noise from Ridley's attacks on Carol. Ridley then took Carol's clothes from her and left the room to retrieve the hammer, which is when Carol jumped out the window. She "ran across the snow … looking for just a house that had a light on." Carol knocked on the door of one home and informed the homeowner that she was being abused. The homeowner provided Carol with a blanket to cover herself and called the police.
¶7 When officers responded, Carol was taken to the hospital and administered a sexual assault nurse examiner (SANE) exam. Ridley was arrested that same night, and after obtaining a search warrant for Ridley's daughter's apartment, law enforcement recovered a "blue handled claw hammer."
¶8 The State charged Ridley with second-degree sexual assault with use of force, aggravated battery with intent to cause great bodily harm, strangulation and suffocation, and false imprisonment, all with the domestic abuse enhancer. Later, by amended Information, the State added a charge of first-degree recklessly endangering safety and charged all the crimes as a domestic abuse repeater and with a domestic abuse enhancer. Before trial, the State also filed a motion to admit other-acts evidence of Ridley's conviction[5] on domestic violence offenses against Carol that occurred in Minnesota in 2017.[6] In its motion, the State alleged that the prior conviction and the current charges shared many similarities. After a hearing, the circuit court granted the State's other-acts motion.[7] The case proceeded to trial.
¶9 During voir dire, defense counsel asked the prospective jury pool whether there were One prospective juror expressed an opinion that "[i]t seems like one of [the charges] has got to be true" for Ridley to have been charged with five crimes. The circuit court entered into a colloquy with the prospective juror, concluded that he had been rehabilitated, and eventually denied Ridley's motion to strike the juror for cause. The prospective juror did not sit on Ridley's jury, however, as Ridley removed him from the panel by using a peremptory strike.
¶10 The State called Carol to testify. Carol began her testimony with the other-acts evidence from 2017, which involved Ridley not allowing her to leave and assaulting her by hitting her with his fist and "stomping [her] with [his] boot," which left "boot prints in [her] forehead and the side of [her] face." She testified that she was left with a "straight cut" that "opened [her] face up badly" and required stitches. Carol then stated that Ridley was convicted for the 2017 incident. The State inquired whether Carol had any contact with Ridley since the 2017 incident, and Carol responded, Defense counsel objected, and the State immediately asked the question again. This time, Carol responded that she had not had in-person contact with Ridley without mentioning prison. The circuit court did not address defense counsel's objection.
¶11 During Carol's testimony, the State also introduced several pictures as exhibits. Many of the pictures showed Carol in the aftermath of the attack. One picture, however-Exhibit 11-was a picture of Ridley, which he describes on appeal as depicting him Defense counsel objected to Exhibit 11's introduction due to lack of foundation, and the circuit court sustained the objection. Nevertheless, as the State was publishing the pictures to the jury, Exhibit 11 was momentarily published on a screen visible to the jury in the courtroom. Defense counsel objected, and the prosecutor explained that "[i]t was a mistake" and that she had quickly changed the image.
¶12 During Carol's cross-examination, she also alleged that Ridley had choked her. Carol explained that Ridley had been choking her just before his daughter came into the room to inform him that the neighbors were complaining. Defense counsel observed that Carol had not "testified about any choking" during her direct examination, and he continued questioning her about the alleged conduct. On redirect, the State also asked questions about choking and whether Ridley had "put his arms or his hands around [Carol's] throat during one of the times that he was attacking [Carol] in Superior." Carol responded by stating that her "throat was already messed up because he had choked me … two previous times." Defense counsel immediately objected, and, at first, the circuit court overruled the objection. The court later sustained the objection when defense counsel clarified that the previous choking incidents were not included in the 2017 other-acts evidence.[8] The court then struck the testimony and told the jury to disregard it.
¶13 Following Carol's testimony, and outside the presence of the jury, Ridley moved for a mistrial for two reasons: the prosecutor publishing Exhibit 11 to the jury and Carol's discussion of the previous choking incidents. The circuit court denied Ridley's motion on both grounds. The trial then continued.
¶14 In addition to Carol's testimony, the jury heard testimony from various law enforcement personnel, the SANE and an analyst from the state crime laboratory. The jury was told that Carol's DNA was found on the head of the hammer and that, based on the tests conducted, there is "very strong support...
To continue reading
Request your trial