Freeman v. State

Following a jury trial, Tina Freeman was convicted of child cruelty for causing her son, L. A., cruel and excessive pain by failing to seek medical attention for the child and instructing him to conceal the cause of his injuries. She appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and alleging that the trial court erred in excluding certain evidence. We affirm, for reasons that follow. Viewed in a light favorable to the verdict,1 the evidence shows that in August 2001, middle school counselor Kay Clark and campus police officer Mike Young observed several circular marks on the arms and hands of L. A., an eighth grade special education student. L. A. initially stated that the marks were cuts that he sustained while water-skiing and bug bites. However, based on the appearance of the wounds, both Clark and Young believed that the marks were burns.

Clark and Young spoke to L. A. again the following day, and he repeated that the marks on his hands and arms were cuts and insect bites. After further questioning, L. A. stated that approximately one week earlier, his mother’s boyfriend, Vinson Bentley, began drinking heavily. L. A., Freeman, his two siblings, and Bentley’s son left home and went to a neighboring trailer. L. A. stated that he later climbed back into his home through a window in order to retrieve a bottle for his youngest sibling. As he was leaving, Bentley grabbed L. A., yelled at him, and burned him with a lit cigar.