Jenkins v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jenkins v. State

668 So. 2d 1003, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 269, 1996 WL 16594

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 19, 1996

DocketNo. 94-03735

StatusPublished

This text of 668 So. 2d 1003 (Jenkins v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jenkins v. State, 668 So. 2d 1003, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 269, 1996 WL 16594 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

WHATLEY, Judge.

The appellant, David Richard Jenkins, challenges his convictions for four counts of capital sexual battery. We find merit only in his contention that the trial court erred in denying his motion to require the victim to submit to an independent psychological evaluation, and we therefore reverse.

Psychological examinations may be ordered where the victim’s credibility is at issue. Camejo v. State, 660 So.2d 242 (Fla. 1995). Before ordering an independent psychological evaluation of a victim where the victim’s credibility is at issue, the trial court must determine whether there is strong and compelling evidence supporting the need for the evaluation. Camejo, 660 So.2d at 243. To require a victim to submit to a psychological evaluation is a significant invasion of the victim’s privacy and should be ordered only in extreme circumstances. State v. LeBlanc, 558 So.2d 507 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). We conclude that the unique and specific facts of this case support the need for a psychological evaluation.

Jenkins was convicted after a second jury trial. The first trial ended in a mistrial after the jury was unable to reach a verdict.¹ At Jenkins’ first trial, Dr. Ralph C. Under-wager, a psychologist, was qualified as an expert witness in the field of child psychology and in the speciality of child sexual abuse. Dr. Underwager opined that the victim’s testimony was consistent with research on false allegations.²

Further, the psychological exam was especially important in light of that fact that the victim admitted to lying to protect her mother and to stay out of trouble. The victim is Jenkins’ ten-year-old adopted daughter. Jenkins and the victim’s mother were involved in divorce proceedings at the time the charges were brought. In addition, the medical testimony seemed to contradict the victim’s allegations.

Accordingly, we reverse the judgment and sentence and remand for a new trial consistent with this opinion.

FRANK, A.C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

WHATLEY, Judge.

The appellant, David Richard Jenkins, challenges his convictions for four counts of capital sexual battery. We find merit only in his contention that the trial court erred in denying his motion to require the victim to submit to an independent psychological evaluation, and we therefore reverse.

Psychological examinations may be ordered where the victim’s credibility is at issue. Camejo v. State, 660 So.2d 242 (Fla. 1995). Before ordering an independent psychological evaluation of a victim where the victim’s credibility is at issue, the trial court must determine whether there is strong and compelling evidence supporting the need for the evaluation. Camejo, 660 So.2d at 243. To require a victim to submit to a psychological evaluation is a significant invasion of the victim’s privacy and should be ordered only in extreme circumstances. State v. LeBlanc, 558 So.2d 507 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). We conclude that the unique and specific facts of this case support the need for a psychological evaluation.

Jenkins was convicted after a second jury trial. The first trial ended in a mistrial after the jury was unable to reach a verdict.¹ At Jenkins’ first trial, Dr. Ralph C. Under-wager, a psychologist, was qualified as an expert witness in the field of child psychology and in the speciality of child sexual abuse. Dr. Underwager opined that the victim’s testimony was consistent with research on false allegations.²

Further, the psychological exam was especially important in light of that fact that the victim admitted to lying to protect her mother and to stay out of trouble. The victim is Jenkins’ ten-year-old adopted daughter. Jenkins and the victim’s mother were involved in divorce proceedings at the time the charges were brought. In addition, the medical testimony seemed to contradict the victim’s allegations.

Accordingly, we reverse the judgment and sentence and remand for a new trial consistent with this opinion.

FRANK, A.C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

668 So. 2d 1003, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 269, 1996 WL 16594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jenkins-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack