State v. Vasquez-Ramirez
| Decision Date | 28 December 2016 |
| Docket Number | 16–325 |
| Citation | 210 So.3d 521 |
| Parties | STATE of Louisiana v. Francisco Jesus VASQUEZ–RAMIREZ |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
Hon. Keith A. Stutes, Fifteenth Judicial District Attorney, Ronald E. Dauterive, Assistant District Attorney, P. O. Box 3306, Lafayette, LA 70502, (337) 232–5170, COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE: State of Louisiana
Annette Fuller Roach, Louisiana Appellate Project, P. O. Box 1747, Lake Charles, LA 70602–1747, (337) 436–2900, COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT: Francisco Jesus Vasquez–Ramirez
Court composed of Sylvia R. Cooks, John D. Saunders, and Shannon J. Gremillion, Judges.
The Defendant, Francisco Jesus Vasquez–Ramirez, appeals his conviction for Indecent Behavior with a Juvenile, a violation of La.R.S. 14:81, and his sentence of twenty years with hard labor without benefit of parole. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
Alejandra Hargrave, a teacher at Ridge Elementary School in Duson, Louisiana, noticed that the victim, Y.M.R., and her sister were absent from school for three weeks before Easter 2014. When Mrs. Hargrave learned the girls were at their aunt's house in Pennsylvania, she contacted the aunt, the girls' mother (who had been deported to Guatemala), and a lawyer about obtaining guardianship of the girls. When the girls' mother signed the paperwork, Mrs. Hargrave and her husband went to Pennsylvania to get the girls. The girls returned to Louisiana the last week of May 2014. Sometime after the girls returned, Mrs. Hargrave noticed a yellow fluid on the victim's panties and noticed the victim was "itching all the time." The victim's sister told Mrs. Hargrave that the victim was sexually molested by a man at their old house.
When Mrs. Hargrave asked the victim, the victim said she was raped by a man named "Francisco." Mrs. Hargrave called the girls' mother in Guatemala and learned that Francisco's full name was Francisco Vasquez–Ramirez. According to Mrs. Hargrave, the victim said Francisco touched her vagina and "butt" with his fingers and penis. The victim told Mrs. Hargrave the touching started when she was in the second grade, which would have been in 2013. Mrs. Hargrave called the police.
Detective George Crowder with the Lafayette Parish Sheriff's Office testified that the victim told him Francisco touched her vagina every day when she and her sister came home from school. Detective Crowder witnessed the victim's Hearts of Hope interview, at which time the victim gave the same or similar statements to the interviewer.
The victim's interview took place at Hearts of Hope on August 27, 2014. The victim was eight years old at the time of the interview. The victim stated that before her present living arrangement, she lived with a lot of adult men in one house, and every day when she returned from school, one of the men touched her bottom. The victim said the man's name was Francisco, and he would touch her with his "pee pee" underneath her clothes and inside her bottom. According to the victim, it happened more than one time—every day when she came home from school. The victim's sister would also be in the room. When asked if Francisco touched her with any other part of his body, the victim said, "No." Later in the interview, the victim said Francisco used his hand to touch her in her "front bottom" and "back bottom." When asked if Francisco did anything else to make her feel uncomfortable, the victim said he kissed her on her mouth twice. At trial, the victim identified the Defendant as the Francisco that had done the things she described in her Hearts of Hope interview.
In the interview, when asked if anyone else tried to do something to her, the victim said the brother of her mom's boyfriend did the same thing to her as Francisco. The victim said it was easier to call this other person "F." When asked if "F" did the exact same thing to her as Francisco or something different, the victim said something different. The victim also said that "F" did these things to her at the same house that Francisco touched her. When asked what part of "F's" body touched her, the victim said the same as Francisco—inside her bottom and her front bottom. Again, only her sister saw this happen. According to the victim, her mom was in Guatemala when this happened. The victim said that "F" was on television and was suspected of doing the same thing to other kids.
On September 25, 2014, the Defendant, Francisco Jesus Vasquez–Ramirez, was charged by bill of information with one count of molestation of a juvenile (age seven), a violation of La.R.S. 14:81.2. On October 3, 2014, the Defendant entered a written plea of not guilty to the charge. On March 30, 2015, an interpreter was appointed for the Defendant and jury selection began.
On cross-examination at trial, the victim explained that before she moved to Duson, Louisiana, she lived in North Carolina with her biological mom (Aldalena) and her biological dad (Tierfalo). According to the victim, her mom left her biological father, but she did not know why. When the victim moved to Duson in 2012, Orbelio (her mom's boyfriend) and Jaime (a male), lived in the house with her. The victim did not remember if the Defendant lived in the house at that time. Between 2012 and 2014, Felencio (the brother of her mom's boyfriend) lived in the house. When specifically asked if the Defendant was living in the house at any point, the victim said he was already living in the house when she arrived in 2012. Although the victim did not know the Defendant's name at that time, she later learned his name was Francisco Vasquez–Ramirez. The victim testified that her mom's boyfriend (Orbelio Ramirez) was the Defendant's nephew. According to the victim, the brother of her mom's boyfriend would normally open the door for them after school. When the boyfriend of the victim's mom would return from work, "Mr. Ramirez" would be with him.
On cross-examination, it was determined that the victim actually made two trips to Pennsylvania—one with her biological mom and one after her biological mom returned to Guatemala.
During defense counsel's extensive cross-examination of the victim regarding her trips to Pennsylvania, the State objected to defense counsel's "endless fishing expedition on a trip to Pennsylvania and coming back." The trial court denied the objection, finding the victim was on cross and defense counsel was not badgering the witness. Defense counsel resumed questioning the victim regarding her trips to Pennsylvania and then began questioning the victim as to the details of her life at home after her mom went back to Guatemala. During this line of questioning, the State asked to approach the bench and asserted an objection: The trial court denied the objection, stating the following:
Listen, the jury is as uncomfortable as you are. That's [defense counsel]'s deal. Okay? I know what you're saying. And I can see the face of the jury. They don't like it, either. But that's what he's doing, so he's doing it. Okay?
Defense counsel resumed questioning the victim about the details of her home life and then launched into the following colloquy:
When defense counsel offered to take a break, the trial judge asked the victim if she wanted to see her mom for a minute. The victim nodded in the affirmative, and the court took a ten-minute break. At the end of the break, the State informed the court that the victim had "broken down" and could not take any further questioning. Counsel for the defense then moved for dismissal of the case. The trial court, instead, ruled that much time had been "wasted" questioning the victim about trips to Pennsylvania, and counsel's questioning of the witness was going to be limited to ten-to-fifteen minutes. The trial court further stated that more time might be allowed. Counsel objected and asked for an immediate writ of review to this court, which was denied.
After another break, the victim returned to the courtroom with her mother. The jury also returned to the courtroom, and the trial judge instructed the guardian to stand behind the victim while the victim sat on the stand. Defense counsel asked for a sidebar, during which time the State asked that the victim's guardian be allowed to stand behind her during the remainder of her testimony, which the trial court allowed over objection. Counsel for Defendant then elected to not proceed with further cross-examination. The State then rested, and Defendant proceeded with his defense.
Orbelio Ramirez testified that he used to be in a relationship with the victim's mom, and the victim was like his daughter. After the victim's mom returned to Guatemala, Orbelio took care of the victim and the victim's sister for approximately six months. According to Orbelio, the Defendant was his uncle, and the Defendant did not have any responsibility for taking care of the victim and her sister. Orbelio testified that he and the Defendant worked together from 7:00 in the morning...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Vasquez v. S W Mccain
...the Case I. Factual Background The facts, as set forth by the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal, State v. Vasquez-Ramirez, 2016-325 (La. App. 3 Cir. 12/28/16) 210 So.3d 521, 523-26, are as follows: Alejandra Hargrave, a teacher at Ridge Elementary School in Duson, Louisiana, noticed t......
- State v. Brooks