Alexander v. State

Neither the fact that the trial judge's wife was a counselor at the victim's former high school, nor the fact that the trial judge signed the defendant's arrest warrant, constituted a sufficiently valid basis for recusal

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Andre Alexander was found guilty by a jury of aggravated sodomy, aggravated assault with intent to rape, and burglary. Following the denial of his motion for new trial, Alexander appeals, raising 10 enumerations of error. We find no basis for reversal, and we affirm. The victim, 20 years old at the time of trial, testified that on the morning of October 2, 2002, she wrapped herself in a towel after showering, turned to enter her bedroom, and saw Alexander “standing there with his penis exposed.” He placed her on her bed against her will, twice attempted to insert his penis into her vagina, and licked her vagina. During this time, the victim asked Alexander “who he was and why . . . he was doing it.” Although Alexander “looked familiar” to the victim, she “didn’t know who he was.” The victim managed to escape Alexander’s grasp and found her telephone, but Alexander chased her and took the telephone away after a brief struggle. He then left the residence. A sheriff’s deputy testified that it took him 6 minutes and 46 seconds to walk between the victim’s residence and Alexander’s residence. During his walk, he found the victim’s telephone.

1. Alexander argues that the trial court erroneously admitted evidence of similar transactions. The trial court conducted a hearing required by Uniform Superior Court Rule 31.3 and instructed the jury on the purposes for which it could consider the evidence. The State then presented the testimony of witnesses who were related to Alexander. The 16 year old victim of the first transaction testified that on April 29, 2002, she was awakened to find a man’s hand pushing down on her mouth. She managed to scream, however. She could not see the man’s face because it was dark. Her mother testified that she was awakened by the victim’s screams. She ran into her kitchen to find her male friend “tussling” with another man, who escaped by jumping out a window.

Alexander v. State

Neither the fact that the trial judge's wife was a counselor at the victim's former high school, nor the fact that the trial judge signed the defendant's arrest warrant, constituted a sufficiently valid basis for recusal

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report