 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
[T] State v. Norfleet7/15/2003
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Defendant Jackie Norfleet appeals from the judgment entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of two counts of statutory rape and two counts of taking indecent liberties with a minor. On appeal, defendant asserts that the trial court erred: (1) by failing to strike testimony regarding defendant's prior conviction; (2) by allowing the admission of a portion of the State's expert testimony; (3) by allowing the admission of testimony by the State's rebuttal witness; (4) by allowing the State's witnesses totestify about the victim's truthfulness; and (5) that defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel. After careful consideration of the record and briefs, we find no prejudicial error.
The evidence tends to show the following: Defendant and C.L.N. ("victim") met in September 1996. Victim was thirteen years old at the time. Defendant was thirty-three. Victim first began talking to defendant when she saw him walking down her street on his way home from work. On 17 September 1996, victim rode her bike to defendant's home. Victim watched television with defendant's stepchildren and played with his pets. Victim testified that defendant kissed her after she walked into his kitchen. Defendant asked victim to be his girlfriend. No one else witnessed this kiss or heard the conversation between them.
Victim returned to defendant's home the following day. On the 18th of September, defendant's stepchildren and wife were not in the house. Victim testified that she and defendant had vaginal intercourse in his bedroom. Over the next two weeks, victim and defendant had vaginal intercourse on at least two more occasions. Defendant also performed oral sex on victim during one encounter. Victim was unable to recall the exact dates she had sexual contact with defendant, except for the 18th of September. Victim and her mother testified that victim circled 18 September 1996 on hercalendar and that the circling indicated the date victim had her first sexual experience.
The State presented substantial testimony regarding the victim's sexual relationship with defendant from several of victim's classmates, friends and family. In addition, a clinical social worker, Stephanie Rodelander, testified about victim's treatment and therapy. Rodelander opined that victim did not have difficulty distinguishing between fantasy and reality.
Defendant presented his wife's testimony in his defense. Mrs. Norfleet testified that defendant had large genitalia. Mrs. Norfleet stated that the size of defendant's genitalia would have prevented victim from being able to have intercourse with defendant without victim sustaining vaginal tears or other physical symptoms. On cross-examination, Mrs. Norfleet stated that she told victim's parents to keep victim away from the Norfleet home during a telephone conversation with them. In addition, one of defendant's former girlfriends, Latricia Barrett, testified that she had suffered physical injuries after engaging in intercourse with defendant because of his unusually large penis.
The State offered the testimony of Robin Battle as a rebuttal witness. Ms. Battle testified that defendant had sexual intercourse with her approximately fifteen years before the date ofhis trial. Ms. Battle testified that she would not describe defendant's penis as unusually large.
The jury returned a guilty verdict on two counts of statutory rape and two counts of taking indecent libertie
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 North Carolina DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|