 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. King9/6/2005
Following a jury trial, appellant was convicted of second-degree criminal sexual conduct, first-degree burglary, second-degree burglary, fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct, fifth-degree criminal sexual conduct, second-degree assault, fifth-degree assault, terroristic threats, and a pattern of harassing conduct. Appellant argues that (1) the district court abused its discretion by permitting expert testimony on battered-woman syndrome, (2) because the conduct alleged did not involve force or coercion, it did not constitute second-degree criminal sexual conduct, and (3) the district court erred by imposing a sentence with an upward durational departure in violation of Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531 (2004). Because we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the expert testimony and that the jury could have reasonably concluded that the conduct alleged constituted second-degree criminal sexual conduct, we affirm the conviction. But because appellant's sentence violated his constitutional right to a jury trial, we reverse and remand for resentencing consistent with Blakely.
FACTS
In February 2003, appellant Billy Demetrius King began a romantic relationship with S.S. Less than a month later, appellant moved into S.S.'s apartment. Almost immediately, the couple began to argue and disagree about her choice of friends and their influence over her decision-making. S.S. testified that appellant exercised a large amount of control over her personal freedom:
I couldn't go certain places. I had to be in the house at a certain time. When he called, I had to be there. He told me I couldn't cook, but then he would tell me he wanted me to cook him something to eat. When I didn't do it, I was called disobedient.
Over the next several months, the relationship became increasingly physically abusive. S.S. testified about an incident in May 2003, when appellant pushed her onto the bathroom floor and held "his hand over mouth [so she] couldn't breathe." Despite the altercation, the couple's relationship continued. S.S. stated, "At that point in time, . . . I didn't look at it as a bad situation, because we had, you know, we had good times. He came and he said he was sorry and I accepted his apology." But S.S. also testified that the abuse continued, occurring "every other day."
Over the summer, the relationship worsened, and the physical abuse continued. S.S. testified about another incident occurring in September:
Q: I'm going to focus your attention on September 30th, 2003, the incident regarding the ambulance. Can you describe what you remember about that?
A: We was out in Burnsville, at my house. And I had had a drink. We was arguing. He pushed me, I fell, I hit my head. When I woke up, I was in an ambulance.
Q: What did you tell the ambulance driver about how your injuries happened?
A: . . . I said me and my boyfriend got into a fight. And I was having seizures at that time and so I kept going in and out.
Q: Did you stay in the hospital?
A: No, I didn't.
Q: Why not?
A: Because he had called--well, I called him from the room. And he told me, he goes what [did I] tell them? I told him nothing. I told him I was okay. I took my IV out and I told . . . the security guard that I was going to meet my uncle out front. I walked out front and got in the truck with [appellant].
Once inside the truck, appellant again apologized to S.S. At that time, appellant no longer continuously resided in S.S.'s apartment, but continued to visit "on and off." On Sunday, December 7, 2003, S.S. "he
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Minnesota Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|