STATE v A D M
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
No. 84-525 I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE O M N A A F F OTN 1985 STATE O MONTANA, F Plaintiff and R e s p o n d e n t , -vsA. D. M., D e f e n d a n t and A p p e l l a n t . APPEAL FROM: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e F i r s t J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , I n and f o r t h e County o f Lewis & C l a r k , The H o n o r a b l e Henry L o b l e , J u d g e p r e s i d i n g . COUNSEL O RECORD: F For A p p e l l a n t : Cannon & Sheehy; Edmund F. Sheehy, H e l e n a , Montana F o r Respondent: Hon. Mike G r e e l y , A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , H e l e n a , Montana Mike McGrath, County A t t o r n e y , H e l e n a , Montana S u b m i t t e d on B r i e f s : Decided: / - I ;,9 g - d + I Clerk A p r i l 11, 1985 J u n e 25, 1985 Mr. Justice Court C. L. Defendant Gulbrandson d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion o f appea 1s from a conviction a s s a u l t p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n 45-5-502, of felony the sexua 1 following a jury MCA, t r i a l i n t h e F i r s t J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Lewis and C l a r k C o u n t y , on May 1 6 , 1984. School 24, We affirm. officials notified the authorities on October 1 9 8 3 , t h a t d e f e n d a n t was a l l e g e d t o h a v e committed s e x u a l a s s a u l t upon h i s f i v e - y e a r - o l d daughter. Rita Pickering, a s o c i a l w o r k e r from t h e w e l f a r e d e p a r t m e n t , removed t h e c h i l d from school on October 26 in order to interview her. P i c k e r i n g and a s h e r i f f ' s d e p a r t m e n t d e t e c t i v e c o n d u c t e d and r e c o r d e d an removed from In had i n t e r v i e w o f t h e c h i l d and a s a r e s u l t s h e was the forced defendant's interview, home the and placed in foster c h i l d d e s c r i b e d how h e r her t o play with h i s "winker dinker;" care. father s h e used a n a t o m i c a l l y c o r r e c t d o l l s t o d e m o n s t r a t e how s h e was f o r c e d t o m a s t u r b a t e d e f e n d a n t and p e r f o r m o r a l s e x ; t a s t e and s m e l l o f e j a c u l a t e ; the color, t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t had t o u c h e d h e r , she described she t o l d Pickering s u c k e d h e r " b o o b i e s " and g o t t e n on t o p o f h e r and p u t h i s p e n i s i n s i d e h e r ; s h e used t h e d o l l s t o d e m o n s t r a t e how h e r f a t h e r had "humped" h e r ; she said she that described The she a "bleeded" after videotape her defendant was these activities; f a t h e r made o f arrested on and these activities. February 1, 1984 and c h a r g e d w i t h s e x u a l l y a s s a u l t i n g h i s d a u g h t e r on a number o f occasions over t h e period o c c u r r i n g O c t o b e r 25, of 1983. a year, with the l a s t assault He p l e d n o t g u i l t y and a j u r y t r i a l was h e l d on May 1 4 , 15 and 1 6 , 1984. At trial, the State produced the child's t h r o u g h a v i d e o t a p e t a k e n a t h e r f o s t e r home. testimony Rita Pickering and the foster mother testified that the child's earlier s t a t e m e n t s and i n t e r v i e w s were c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e v i d e o t a p e d testimony. A clinical psychologist who had examined the c h i l d t e s t i f i e d t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f s e x u a l a c t i v i t y was beyond t h a t which s h e would b e a b l e t o f a n t a s i z e ; h e r terminology was c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h a t o f a f i v e o r s i x y e a r o l d ; would b e v e r y u n l i k e l y t h a t she could and it have picked up such i n f o r m a t i o n from w a t c h i n g p o r n o g r a p h y o r o t h e r p e o p l e engaged i n sexual relations. The d e f e n d a n t o f f e r e d t e s t i m o n y t h a t h i s o p p o r t u n i t y t o e n g a g e i n t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s was r a r e b e c a u s e o f t h e p r e s e n c e o f o t h e r a d u l t s i n t h e h o u s e and h i s a b s e n c e from home. testified friends that and the that terms the the child child may used have came seen from some He family sexually e x p l i c i t v i d e o t a p e s h e owned. The i s s u e s p r e s e n t e d on a p p e a l a r e : (1) Was t h e v i c t i m ' s u n c o r r o b o r a t e d t e s t i m o n y , due t o h e r age, s u f f i c i e n t t o convict defendant? (2) Was the evidence insufficient as a whole to convict defendant? The d e f e n d a n t c o n t e n d s t h a t when a c h i l d o f testifies after testimony should information length of undergoing be therapy corroborated. between counseling, points He out her that the less r e l i a b l e due t o t h e from t h e c h i l d became time and t h i s age t h e o f f e n s e s and h e r t e s t i m o n y and b e c a u s e s h e was r e q u i r e d t o r e c o u n t t h e e v e n t s i n c o u n s e l i n g and does on other occasions. not S t a t e v. require Just 962; S t a t e v. 453, 458. I n Montana, corroboration ( 1 9 7 9 ) , 184 Mont. Metcalf in a 262, a victim's testimony sexual assault 270-1, 6 0 2 P.2d ( 1 9 6 9 ) , 153 Mont. 369, On a t l e a s t two p r i o r o c c a s i o n s , 378, case. 957, 457 P.2d t h i s Court has found four-year testify. In St.Rep. old sexual S t a t e v. 2131, the assault Rogers child's victims (Mont. competent 1 9 8 4 ) , 692 P.2d testimony was 2, consistent to 41 with e a r l i e r statements t o others except f o r d e t a i l s a s t o dates and t i m e s . In another recent case, 19851, P.2d t e s t i m o n y was , 42 S t . R e p . corroborated Here, with her p r i o r reports She arguments also was go 770, only one (Mont. four-year the D.B.S. old's other witness, the t h e v i c t i m ' s t e s t i m o n y was c o n s i s t e n t c h i l d ' s mother. testimony. by S t a t e v. and s u p p o r t e d by t h e p s y c h o l o g i s t ' s competent to the to Defendant' s testify. weight or credibility of the The j u r y had a l l t h e e v i d e n c e b e f o r e it and found testimony. t h e c h i l d ' s testimony c r e d i b l e . p r i o r Montana law, W hold, i n accordance with e that the victim's testimony i n a sexual a s s a u l t case does n o t r e q u i r e corroboration. The defendant insufficient as a also whole argues to that support the the evidence jury's was verdict of The t e s t f o r d e t e r m i n i n g i f g u i l t y of felony sexual assault. s u b s t a n t i a l evidence supports a conviction i s whether, a f t e r viewing the in evidence any prosecution, rational essential e l e m e n t s of State Rodriguiz v. St.Rep. 578F, 307, 99 S . C t . weak and most favorable c r i m e beyond enough to to the 1981), 628 a reasonable doubt. P.2d 5781; and J a c k s o n v . V i r g i n i a c o n f l i c t with a 38 ( 1 9 7 9 ) , 443 U.S. it may s t i l l b e verdict. State 1 3 0 6 , 1 3 0 8 , 40 S t . R e p . 621, 624. spouse t o contact without consent sexual Hall p e r s o n who k n o w i n g l y s u b j e c t s a n o t h e r n o t h i s MCA on v. provides: sexual 45-5-502(l), 283, Even i f t h e e v i d e n c e i s 560. other evidence, support 280, assault Section any the (Mont. (Mont. 1 9 8 3 ) , 662 P.2d "A light t r i e r o f f a c t c o u l d h a v e found t h e 2781, 6 1 L.Ed.2d in substantial the commits the offense of S e x u a l c o n t a c t i s d e f i n e d a s "any t o u c h i n g sexual a s s a u l t . " of the sexual or other intimate parts of the person of a n o t h e r f o r t h e purpose o f arousing o r g r a t i f y i n g t h e sexual S e c t i o n 45-2-101(60), desire of e i t h e r party." MCA. The v i c t i m t e s t i f i e d e x t e n s i v e l y by v i d e o t a p e a b o u t h e r sexual a c t i v i t i e s with defendant. She p r o v i d e d d e t a i l s a b o u t the and surrounding consistent with testified that information; exceeded not she was capable her description i n those terminology activities testimony alleged at trial notice before and with testimony The of of activities; consistent child. her interviews. t h a t which c o u l d b e e x p e c t e d six-year-old hour's earlier that engaged used circumstances psychologist providing sexual was reliable activities far from someone who had that that her of description a five or Although t h e v i d e o t a p e o f t h e s e s e x u a l to have indicated the been made was never defendant had at found, least one s h e r i f f ' s deputies arrived with a s ~ a r c hw a r r a n t and t h e d e p u t i e s found a v i d e o c a m e r a , tape p l a y e r and t a p e s on t h e p r e m i s e s . We hold that the jury's verdict was supported by s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e and w e w i l l n o t o v e r t u r n t h e c o n v i c t i o n on a p p e a l . W e concur: __--
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
