Vick v. State
| Decision Date | 22 February 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. A89A1961,A89A1961 |
| Citation | 194 Ga.App. 616,391 S.E.2d 455 |
| Parties | VICK v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
George R. Asinc, Marietta, for appellant.
Thomas J. Charron, Dist. Atty., Charles Norman, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Appellant appeals his conviction of child molestation. The evidence adduced at trial shows that appellant and his live-in companion frequently baby-sat for the twelve-year-old victim and her younger sister, who were unrelated to appellant. On the day in question, appellant's companion and the younger sister went to the library, and appellant asked the victim to stay and help him with his baby. The victim testified that appellant then pulled down her pants, placed his finger in her vagina, and also placed his penis inside her. Her sister testified that appellant attempted to kiss the victim when they were leaving, but the victim pulled away from him.
1. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence a video and audiotape interview with the victim. However, a taped interview with a child is admissible under OCGA § 24-3-16, which permits the statement of a child under the age of 14 to be admitted if it describes acts of sexual contact or physical abuse, if the child is available to testify in court, and if the circumstances of the statement are shown to have a sufficient indicia of reliability. Newberry v. State, 184 Ga.App. 356(1), 361 S.E.2d 499 (1987). At trial, appellant's only objection went to the relevance of the statement contained on the tape. On appeal he contends that it was not part of the res gestae. Issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered by this court. Stokely v. State, 188 Ga.App. 489(2), 373 S.E.2d 230 (1988); Smith v. State, 186 Ga.App. 303, 306, 367 S.E.2d 573 (1988).
2. Appellant further asserts as error the trial court's grant of the State's motion in limine, which excluded evidence related to the victim's statement that her father periodically "checked her to see if she had been messing around with boys" and impermissibly restricted his right of cross-examination of the victim because he was not allowed to question the victim as to why she was afraid of her father, her motives for testifying, and about possible reasons for the stretching of her hymen. The trial transcript reveals that appellant was allowed to cross-examine the victim about the reasons she was afraid of her father but did not develop this line of questioning. Although appellant was not allowed to cross-examine the victim as to her statement that her father periodically checked to see if she was "messing around" with boys, such a line of questioning is barred because it is irrelevant in proving whether appellant committed the crime for which he is on trial. Chastain v. State, 180 Ga.App. 312(2), 349 S.E.2d 6 (1986); aff'd 257 Ga. 54, 354 S.E.2d 421 (1987). Questions concerning the victim's use of tampons during menstrual periods and whether she had inserted anything else in her vagina were properly disallowed,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Heidler v. State
...accordance with OCGA § 24-3-16, which permits the introduction of videotaped interviews of child sex abuse victims. See Vick v. State, 194 Ga.App. 616(1), 391 S.E.2d 455 (1990). Each girl was interviewed separately by a law enforcement officer and a DFCS caseworker trained to conduct this t......
-
Thornton v. State
...are not inherently inadmissible under the Child Hearsay Act if the requirements of the statute are otherwise met. Vick v. State, 194 Ga.App. 616, 391 S.E.2d 455 (1990). In her interview Cyquieta stated that when she left for school on the morning of Artealia's death, Artealia was not sick. ......
-
Rental Equipment Group, LLC v. MACI, LLC
...appeal. "Issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered by this court." (Citations omitted.) Vick v. State, 194 Ga.App. 616, 617(1), 391 S.E.2d 455 (1990). Not only must the objection be timely raised in the trial court, but the trial judge must rule upon the same issue a......
-
Gentry v. State
...the testimony now challenged or to the admission of the videotaped interviews with the victims of each of the offenses. Vick v. State, 194 Ga.App. 616(1), 391 S.E.2d 455. Judgment POPE, C.J., and SMITH, J., concur. ...
-
Death Penalty Law - Michael Mears
...58-60, 537 S.E.2d at 52-53. 198. Id. at 60, 537 S.E.2d at 53. 199. Id. (citing O.C.G.A. Sec. 24-3-16 (1995 & Supp. 2001); Vick v. State, 194 Ga. App. 616, 391 S.E.2d 455 (1990)). 200. Id.; see GA. Const, art. I, Sec. 1, para. 14. 201. 273 Ga. at 60, 537 S.E.2d at 53. 202. Id. 203. Id. at 64......