Milan v. State

A jury found Warren Milan guilty of child molestation. On appeal, Milan challenges the sufficiency of the evidence. He also contends that the trial court erred in: limiting the scope of a defense expert’s testimony; admitting hearsay; permitting the State to argue witness credibility in closing; and charging the jury. Finally, Milan asserts that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. As we find that Milan’s allegations of error present no basis for reversal, we affirm. 1. On appeal from a criminal conviction, Milan no longer enjoys a presumption of innocence, and we view the evidence in a light favorable to the verdict.1 In so doing, we neither weigh the evidence nor judge witness credibility, but merely determine whether the evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find the defendant guilty of molestation beyond a reasonable doubt.2

Viewed in this manner, the evidence reveals that, on February 12, 2006, Debra Quinn was sitting in her car at a shopping center when she saw what she believed to be a man pinning a woman against a car and kissing her with an open mouth. There was one empty parking space between Quinn and the couple. After observing this for a few moments, Quinn realized that the man —whom she identified as Milan —was actually kissing a small boy, whose feet were “clamped down” under the man’s arms.3 Milan’s hands were cupped around the boy’s buttocks, and he had the child’s legs spread around his body. According to Quinn, this lasted for several minutes.