Estrada v. State

The 6-year-old victim's hearsay statements were admissible under O.C.G.A. § 24-3-16, since the people to whom the victim made the outcries were available to testify and the circumstances of the statements provided sufficient indicia of reliability.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Rodolfo Estrada appeals from the denial of his motion for new trial following his conviction by a jury of aggravated sodomy,1 aggravated child molestation,2 and first degree cruelty to children.3 He contends that the trial court erred by 1 admitting child hearsay testimony from the victim, 2 admitting his confession, 3 admitting testimony about the results of a DNA test, and 4 refusing to charge the jury on the mandatory sentence he faced. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

Construed in favor of the verdict,4 the record shows that six-year-old D. F. and her mother were temporarily living with Estrada, his wife, and their family. One night, Estrada’s wife awoke to strange sounds coming from the foot of their bed, where D. F. slept on an air mattress. She saw Estrada look up from D. F.’s mattress and asked him what he was doing. Estrada responded, “It ain’t what you think,” the wife angrily confronted him, and Estrada eventually left the house. The wife asked D. F. what happened, and she said that Estrada had touched her private parts. Shortly thereafter, D. F. disclosed to another family member that Estrada had licked her vagina and touched her anus. Estrada’s wife called the police, and D. F. again disclosed to an officer that Estrada had touched her rear and groin area. D. F. was taken to see a sexual assault nurse examiner, who collected samples from the affected areas, and D. F. later described the abuse to a forensic interviewer. The forensic samples were determined to contain male DNA, but no specific profile could be developed.

Estrada v. State

The 6-year-old victim's hearsay statements were admissible under O.C.G.A. § 24-3-16, since the people to whom the victim made the outcries were available to testify and the circumstances of the statements provided sufficient indicia of reliability.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report