Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Vargas v. State

Vargas v. State

362 S.E.2d 461, 184 Ga. App. 650, 1987 Ga. App. LEXIS 2337
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedOctober 26, 1987
Docket74423
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 362 S.E.2d 461 (Vargas v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Vargas v. State, 362 S.E.2d 461, 184 Ga. App. 650, 1987 Ga. App. LEXIS 2337 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987).

Opinions

McMurray, Presiding Judge.

Defendant appeals his conviction of three counts of the offense of aggravated child molestation. Held:

1. At trial, defense counsel sought to elicit testimony from the victim on cross-examination and to introduce documentary evidence for the purpose of establishing the victim’s ideas and bent of mind about sexual activity so as to explain her allegations against defendant as a fabrication derived from “the phase she’s in.” The trial court did not allow the admission of this evidence and defendant enumerates as error the exclusion of the documentary evidence, several letters authored by the victim discussing boys and sexual activities.

Generally, in a child molestation case evidence as to the victim’s reputation for nonchastity is not admissible. Lively v. State, 157 Ga. App. 419 (3) (278 SE2d 67). Nor may evidence be admitted to discredit the victim by showing her preoccupation with sex. Decker v. State, 139 Ga. App. 707 (2), 708 (2) (229 SE2d 520). See Chastain v. State, 180 Ga. App. 312 (2) (349 SE2d 6), affirmed 257 Ga. 54 (354 SE2d 421). This enumeration of error is without merit.

2. Defendant contends the trial court erred in permitting two witnesses to testify concerning an outcry made by the victim some four months after the last incident of child molestation. The evidence at issue was properly admitted under both the rule stated in Cuzzort v. State, 254 Ga. 745 (334 SE2d 661), and under OCGA § 24-3-16. While the outcry occurred prior to the effective date of OCGA § 24-3-16, the determinative date as to the applicability of OCGA § 24-3-16 [651]*651was the date of trial. Accord Williams v. State, 180 Ga. App. 562 (1), 564 (349 SE2d 797).

Decided October 26, 1987. Jeffrey R. Sliz, for appellant. Thomas C. Lawler III, District Attorney, Phil Wiley, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Sognier, J., concurs. Beasley, J., concurs specially.

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

Related

Hall v. Vargas
608 S.E.2d 200 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2005)
Jarvis v. State
560 S.E.2d 29 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2002)
McGarity v. State
480 S.E.2d 319 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1997)
Baker v. State
439 S.E.2d 668 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1993)
Darden v. State
425 S.E.2d 409 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
Martin v. State
395 S.E.2d 391 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
King v. State
391 S.E.2d 660 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Harris v. State
374 S.E.2d 565 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1988)
Woods v. State
369 S.E.2d 353 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1988)
Celis v. State
369 S.E.2d 53 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1988)
Westbrook v. State
368 S.E.2d 131 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1988)
Vargas v. State
362 S.E.2d 461 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
362 S.E.2d 461, 184 Ga. App. 650, 1987 Ga. App. LEXIS 2337, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vargas-v-state-gactapp-1987.