State v. Robinson

• Decision Date: 21 April 2020
• Docket Number: No. M2019-00303-CCA-R3-CD,M2019-00303-CCA-R3-CD
• Parties: STATE OF TENNESSEE v. RODNEY DARNELL ROBINSON
• Court: Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals

STATE OF TENNESSEE
v.
RODNEY DARNELL ROBINSON

No. M2019-00303-CCA-R3-CD

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE

December 11, 2019 Session
April 21, 2020

Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County
No. 2015-B-1239
Cheryl A. Blackburn, Judge

Rodney Darnell Robinson ("Defendant") was convicted in Davidson County Criminal Court of two counts of child abuse, five counts of aggravated sexual battery, four counts of rape of a child, two counts of sexual battery by an authority figure, two counts of rape, and one count of attempted rape of a child, for which he received an effective sentence of sixty years' incarceration. On appeal, Defendant contends that: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) he was denied the effective assistance of counsel; (3) the trial court erred by allowing trial counsel to proceed while "clearly ill"; (4) the trial court failed to remedy statements made during voir dire by a potential juror, thereby depriving Defendant of a fair trial; (5) the trial court erred in allowing cumulative testimony in the cross-examination of Defendant; (6) the trial court erred in allowing improper leading questions to a witness; (7) the trial court erred in the admission of certain evidence; (8) the trial court erred in the exclusion of certain evidence; (9) there was an appearance of bias from the trial judge that violated Defendant's due process rights; and (10) cumulative error requires a new trial. Following a thorough review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgments of the Criminal Court Affirmed

ROBERT L. HOLLOWAY, JR., J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which ROBERT W. WEDEMEYER and TIMOTHY L. EASTER, JJ., joined.

Benjamin K. Raybin (on appeal) and Brent Horst (at trial), Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Rodney Darnell Robinson.

Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Caitlin Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Glenn Funk, District Attorney General; and Megan King and Doug Thurman, Assistant District Attorneys General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Page 2

OPINION

I. Factual and Procedural Background

In September 2012, the Davidson County Grand Jury indicted Defendant, along with his wife, Demetria Leshe Robinson ("Co-Defendant Robinson"), for twenty-five different offenses relating to allegations of child abuse and sexual abuse made by two fourteen-year-old girls living in their home. In May 2015, the grand jury issued a superseding indictment, charging Defendant and Co-Defendant Robinson with the following offenses:

Indicted; Count	Renumbered; Count	Charged Offense	Classification	Victim
1	N/A	Aggravated Child Abuse	Class B felony	K.B.
2	N/A	Aggravated Child Abuse	Class B felony	K.B.
3	1	Aggravated Sexual; Battery	Class B felony	K.B.
4	2	Aggravated Sexual; Battery	Class B felony	K.B.
5	3	Aggravated Sexual; Battery	Class B felony	K.B.
6	4	Rape of a Child	Class A felony	K.B.
7	5	Rape of a Child	Class A felony	K.B.
8	6	Rape of a Child	Class A felony	K.B.
9	7	Sexual Battery by an; Authority Figure	Class C felony	K.B.
10	8	Sexual Battery by an; Authority Figure	Class C felony	K.B.
11	9	Sexual Battery by an; Authority Figure	Class C felony	K.B.
12	10	Rape	Class B felony	K.B.
13	11	Rape	Class B felony	K.B.
14	12	Rape	Class B felony	K.B.

Page 3

15	13	Aggravated Sexual; Battery	Class B felony	B.B.
16	14	Aggravated Sexual; Battery	Class B felony	B.B.
17	15	Aggravated Sexual; Battery	Class B felony	B.B.
18	16	Rape of a Child	Class A felony	B.B.
19	17	Rape of a Child	Class A felony	B.B.
20	18	Rape of a Child	Class A felony	B.B.
21	19	Sexual Battery by an; Authority Figure	Class C felony	B.B.
22	20	Sexual Battery by an; Authority Figure	Class C felony	B.B.
23	21	Sexual Battery by an; Authority Figure	Class C felony	B.B.
24	22	Rape	Class B felony	B.B.
25	23	Rape	Class B felony	B.B.
26	24	Rape	Class B felony	B.B.

The trial court subsequently severed the defendants' cases for trial and granted Defendant's request to sever Counts 1 and 2 from the remaining counts of the indictment. Following a trial on Counts 1 and 2 in June 2015, Defendant was convicted of the lesser-included offense of child abuse in both counts. As set out above, the remaining counts of the indictment were renumbered for the purposes of Defendant's second trial in February 2017, which is the subject of this appeal.

Second Trial Voir Dire

During voir dire, one potential juror, Mr. Sparks, stated that he had previously served on the grand jury in Dickson County. When asked if he could set aside his experience with the grand jury and apply a presumption of innocence to Defendant, Mr. Sparks said, "[I]n all honesty, in the grand jury we didn't indict anybody unless they had them cold. . . . So in all honesty I'm sitting here thinking, well, [Defendant] wouldn't be

Page 4

here if they didn't have him cold already." He further stated, "I remember at that grand jury . . . any question about them at all, about possible innocence, they were dismissed." The trial court excused Mr. Sparks based on his responses. Defendant's trial counsel requested that the trial court explain to the potential jurors that "the grand jury does not hear all of the evidence." The trial court then instructed:

Just so it will benefit the others, a grand jury does not hear all of the evidence and oftentimes they don't even hear from the alleged victim. They just hear some summary of the things. But I just want to make sure everybody else can provide [Defendant] with the presumption of innocence. Can you do that? Because . . . he only has to be here, and that's it. The State has to prove him guilty. He doesn't have to do anything. [Trial counsel] doesn't have to do anything. He doesn't even have to ask any questions. I suspect he will, but he doesn't have to. All the burden is on the State. Can everybody accept that principle of law?

(Jurors move heads up and down.)

Opening Statement

During Defendant's opening statement, trial counsel asserted:

The evidence will show these allegations were likely initiated and started by the biological mother to these two children who otherwise could have never gotten custody of these two children but because of these allegations eventually did.

. . . .

So things went along pretty smoothly from there for about six years, from 2006 to 2012, with . . . the biological mother, only having periodic and sporadic contact with her children. She would call now and again, and there's even probably a long period of time where she had no contact with them. But she had minimal to no contact with the children for those several years.

Page 5

Trial counsel explained that, on March 14, 2012, Defendant punished K.B.¹ with a "good whooping" that was "in all honesty hard and harsh." He stated that the whipping left bruises that were noticed the following day at school and reported to the Department of Children's Services ("DCS"). Trial counsel continued:

It's very important to note that on that day, . . . [K.B.] never once mentioned anything about sexual abuse. Now, the State's theory or attempt to explain this is that, well, she didn't know any better because she . . . thought what the [defendants] were doing was normal or allegedly doing was normal. But I would submit to you that what really happened was -- there's evidence to show -- that the very next day, March 16^th, before [K.B.] ever alleged sexual abuse to anyone, [the victims' mother] swoops in. I think DCS calls her and says, look, we're not going to let the children go home with the [defendants] tonight, can they stay with you or something like that. For some reason, the children or [K.B.] ends up seeing or speaking with [the victims' mother] the next day. And [the victims' mother] says that she saw a tampon in [K.B.'s] purse, so she thought that was odd. So immediately she jumps to the conclusion, well, maybe [Defendant] is sexually abusing my child because she's too young to be using tampons. So she starts quizzing [K.B.] have you been sexually abused by [Defendant].

Now, what I won't be able to answer for you from the evidence is, you know, was that [the victims' mother] coaching an allegation because she saw an opportunity or is that [K.B.] using an opportunity to explain a tampon because she didn't want to explain to her mother why she had a tampon in her purse if she wasn't sexually active. But what I can tell you is that there was no allegation of sexual abuse until [the victims' mother] . . . who as I said had no chance otherwise of getting custody of these children, is in the picture bringing up the subject. So guess what. The very next day or close to it -- I may be a little bit off on my timing here -- during an official interview by authorities, yes, now [K.B.] says, oh, by the way, yes, I was also sexually abused.

Trial counsel explained that K.B.'s sister, B.B., did not disclose any sexual abuse in her initial interview. However, when DCS interviewed B.B. in June 2012, she stated that she was sexually abused too. Trial counsel stated:

Page 6

What happened between March and June to change [B.B.'s] mind? [The victims' mother] had a conversation with [B.B.] The . . . proof will show, that in April [the victims' mother] . . . who had no chance of getting custody of these children otherwise, went to DCS and says, well, I've been speaking with [B.B.] and she was sexually abused, too. So what do these allegations have in common? They both start with [the victims' mother]. Neither [K.B.] nor [B.B.] ever alleged sexual abuse to anyone until they . . . spoke with [their mother.]

Trial counsel asserted that there were other motives for K.B. and B.B. to make up the allegations of...