Sign Up for Vincent AI
State v. Jones
LOUISIANA APPELLATE PROJECT, By: Peggy J. Sullivan, Monroe, Counsel for Appellant
JAMES E. STEWART, SR., District Attorney, ALEXANDRA L. PORUBSKY, SAMUEL S. CRICHTON, NANCY F. BERGER-SCHNEIDER, Assistant District Attorneys, Counsel for Appellee
Before PITMAN, THOMPSON, and HUNTER, JJ.
The defendant, Marquise Jones, was charged by amended bill of information with molestation of a juvenile under age 13, a violation of La. R.S. 14:81.2. After a jury trial, defendant was found guilty as charged by unanimous verdict. Defendant was sentenced to 40 years’ imprisonment with the first 25 years to be served without benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence. Defendant was notified in writing of the sex offender registration requirements and his motion to reconsider sentence was denied. Defendant appeals his conviction and sentence. For the following reasons, we affirm defendant's conviction and sentence.
The record shows that in August 2016, T.C., who was five years old, complained of vaginal pain to her grandmother, M.J., while taking a bath. T.C. said defendant was her abuser. The next day, T.C. was examined by a pediatrician, Dr. Sheyenne Carper, who found that the child had contracted the sexually transmitted disease of chlamydia.
In September 2016, T.C. was interviewed at the Gingerbread House by Alex Person. Using an anatomical drawing, T.C. was able to identify different parts of the body and referred to her vaginal area as her "noonie." During the conversation, T.C. indicated she had been touched on her vagina and when asked who had touched her there, T.C. replied "Marquise did." T.C. then told the interviewer defendant put his "thing" in her noonie. Using another drawing, T.C. identified defendant's thing as his penis. T.C. stated defendant committed this act at "Hotdog's house." Subsequently, defendant was questioned by police and charged with molestation of a juvenile.
At trial, Shreveport Police Detective Gilbert Monereau testified that he questioned defendant, who admitted to getting treatment for chlamydia and to bringing the children to Hotdog's house when they were in his care. Defendant testified he had not been treated for chlamydia and denied sexually abusing T.C. After hearing the evidence, the jury unanimously found defendant guilty as charged. The trial court sentenced defendant to serve 40 years at hard labor with the first 25 years to be served without benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence and denied defendant's motion to reconsider sentence. This appeal followed.
The defendant contends the evidence presented was insufficient to support a conviction of molestation of a juvenile under age 13. Defendant argues the state failed to prove defendant's guilt because the victim's testimony was unreliable and there was no corroboration of his alleged statement to the police.
In assessing the sufficiency of the evidence, a reviewing court must consider whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U.S. 307, 99 S. Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed. 2d 560 (1979) ; State v. Leger , 2017-2084 (La. 6/26/19), 284 So. 3d 609 ; State v. Frost , 53,312 (La. App. 2 Cir. 3/4/20), 293 So. 3d 708, writ denied , 2020-00628 (La. 11/18/20), 304 So. 3d 416. The appellate court does not assess the credibility of witnesses or reweigh evidence, and accords great deference to the trier of fact's decision to accept or reject witness testimony in whole or in part. State v. Frost, supra . Where there is conflicting testimony about factual matters, the resolution of which depends upon a determination of the credibility of the witnesses, the issue is the weight of the evidence, not its sufficiency. In the absence of internal contradiction or irreconcilable conflict with physical evidence, one witness's testimony, if believed by the trier of fact, is sufficient support for a requisite factual conclusion. State v. Gullette , 43,032 (La. App. 2 Cir. 2/13/08), 975 So. 2d 753. This principle is equally applicable to victims of sexual assault; such testimony alone is sufficient even when the state offers no medical, scientific or physical evidence to prove the commission of the offense by the defendant. State ex rel. P.R.R., Jr. , 45,405 (La. App. 2 Cir. 5/19/10), 36 So. 3d 1138.
Molestation of a juvenile is the commission of a lewd or lascivious act by anyone over age 17 upon the person of a child under age 17, where there is an age difference greater than two years between the persons, with the intention of arousing the sexual desire of either person by the use of influence gained from a position of control or supervision over the juvenile. La. R.S. 14:81.2.
In this case, M.J. testified her adult daughter, also with the initials T.C., is the mother of two children, the victim and her brother. M.J. stated when the child, T.C., complained of vaginal discomfort in August 2016, she asked T.C. if anyone had been "tampering" with her private area and the child named defendant, the former boyfriend of the child's mother. M.J. testified she took T.C. to the doctor for a medical exam the next day.
Dr. Sheyenne Carper, a pediatrician, testified she saw T.C. on August 11, 2016, with a complaint of vaginal irritation. Dr. Carper stated after being examined the child said defendant "put his thing" in her private area. Dr. Carper testified T.C. tested positive for chlamydia, a sexually transmitted disease ("STD"), which confirmed her report of abuse.
T.C. testified she is the mother of a daughter, T.C., and a son, who were currently in the custody of their grandmother. T.C. stated she was incarcerated at the time of trial for an unrelated offense. T.C. testified defendant was her former boyfriend and he lived with her and the children for approximately two years. T.C. stated the children were often left in defendant's supervision when she was working. T.C. testified she contracted chlamydia during her relationship with defendant when he was her only sexual partner.
Gilbert Monereau, a detective with the Shreveport Police, testified that in August 2016, he received a report of sexual abuse of a 5-year-old girl, T.C., who had contracted an STD. Det. Monereau stated he scheduled an interview for the child at Gingerbread House on September 13, 2016, and observed the interview via closed-circuit television. Det. Monereau testified he contacted defendant for questioning in November 2016. Det. Monereau stated after being advised of his Miranda rights, defendant waived his rights and agreed to answer questions. Det. Monereau testified defendant said he lived with T.C., the mother of the victim, and her children from 2012 to 2014. Det. Monereau stated defendant said when babysitting he sometimes took the children with him on visits to the house of his friend, Torey Ferguson, who was called "Hotdog." Det. Monereau testified defendant acknowledged previously being treated for chlamydia. Det. Monereau stated his interview with defendant was not recorded because of a machine malfunction.
The victim, T.C., testified she was 10 years old at the time of trial and she knew the difference between telling the truth and a lie. T.C. stated she was 5 years old when she spoke with a lady at the Gingerbread House about her problem with defendant. The video recording of the interview in which the child described defendant's act of sexual abuse was played for the jury and admitted into evidence. T.C. testified she told the interviewer the truth about the abuse committed by defendant.
The defendant, Marquise Jones, testified he did not molest T.C. and did not give her chlamydia. Defendant stated he was 38 years old at the time of trial, he was the father of a teenage daughter, he had finished twelfth grade and worked in a landscaping business. Defendant testified he told Det. Monereau about being previously treated for an STD, but it was gonorrhea. Defendant stated he lived with the victim's mother from 2012 to 2014 and he supervised the children while their mother was working. Defendant testified he did not tell the police he took the children to Hotdog's house while babysitting and did not say he had tested positive for chlamydia. Defendant acknowledged he had been previously convicted of simple burglary, domestic abuse battery and the federal crime of felon in possession of a firearm.
On rebuttal, M.J. testified she was sure she had once picked up T.C. and her brother from Hotdog's house on Woodrow Street. Det. Monereau testified defendant said in the interview he had taken T.C. and her brother to the house of his friend, Hotdog, while babysitting and he had tested positive for chlamydia. Det. Monereau stated the child, T.C., was the first person to identify defendant as the perpetrator of the sexual abuse and she never named any other potential perpetrator during the investigation of the crime.
After reviewing this record, we find the state presented sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defenda...
Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI
Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting