Truesdale v. State

42 N.E.3d 176 (Table)

Larry J. TRUESDALE, Appellant–Defendant

v.STATE of Indiana, Appellee–Plaintiff.

No. 60A01–1503–CR–104.

Court of Appeals of Indiana.

Nov. 20, 2015.

G. Allen Lidy, Mooresville, IN, Attorney for Appellant.

Gregory F. Zoeller, Attorney General of Indiana, Ellen H. Meilaender, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.

MEMORANDUM DECISION

BAILEY, Judge.

Case Summary

[1] Larry J. Truesdale (“Truesdale”) appeals his convictions for two counts of Sexual Misconduct with a Minor, as Class B felonies;¹ one count of Sexual Misconduct with a Minor, as a Class C felony;² and three counts of Child Seduction, as Class D felonies;³ for sexual contact he had with his stepdaughter, L.C., during her teenage years. We affirm.

Issues

[2] Truesdale presents three issues for our review, which we restate as:

I. Whether the trial court properly excluded evidence that the victim purportedly made a prior false accusation of sexual abuse;

II. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in admitting Truesdale's statement to his wife that he had sexual contact with the victim; and

III. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in admitting improper vouching testimony by a trained forensic child interviewer.⁴

Facts and Procedural History

[3] Truesdale was born in 1969. L.C. was born in 1992. Truesdale began dating L.C.'s mother, Anna, when L.C. was a baby. Truesdale and Anna subsequently married, and the couple lived with L.C., the couple's two children, and Truesdale's daughter from a previous relationship, in a four bedroom home in Owen County.

[4] When L.C. was approximately twelve or thirteen years old, Truesdale kissed L.C. on the mouth and fondled her breasts and genitals while L.C. was sitting with him in a rocking chair in the family home. Thereafter, Truesdale began having sexual contact with L.C. on an almost daily basis. Truesdale would masturbate while kissing and fondling L.C.'s body. He also had L.C. touch his penis until he ejaculated. When L.C. was fourteen or fifteen years old, Truesdale began regularly engaging in oral sex with L.C. Truesdale would place his mouth on L.C.'s genitals, have L.C. place her mouth on his penis, and sometimes engaged in these acts simultaneously. Truesdale told L.C. not to tell anyone about the sexual contact because “no one would believe [her]” and “if it came out, [they] would both go down and everyone would hate [them].” (Tr. 146.) L.C. was afraid to disclose the abuse.

[5] The contact often began under the guise of L.C. giving Truesdale a back or leg massage, which then escalated to sexual activity. At one point the massages occurred in the master bedroom with the door shut. After Anna discovered the bedroom door locked while Truesdale and L.C. were alone inside, Anna insisted that the door remain open because “I don't think it's proper for a—a father and daughter ... to be behind closed doors.” (Tr. 244.). During L.C.'s teenage years, Anna also observed Truesdale going into the bathroom while L.C. was bathing. Anna instructed Truesdale to stop. On another occasion, Anna walked into L.C.'s bedroom and discovered L.C. lying on the bed and Truesdale kissing L.C.'s stomach. L.C.'s pants were pulled down exposing some pubic hair. Because Anna immediately felt “[t]he whole situation was wrong” and “inappropriate” (Tr. 231) and “didn't look right” (Tr. 232), she confronted Truesdale and L.C., both of whom denied sexual activity was occurring. Afterwards, Anna regularly asked L.C. if anything sexual was happening with Truesdale, but L.C. always denied it.

[6] Other family members also were troubled by Truesdale's behavior toward L.C. L.C.'s maternal grandmother, Mary Hefley (“Hefley”), was concerned that Truesdale treated L.C.—who he called “his little Anna” (Tr. 296)—“more like a wife.” (Tr. 297.) Both Hefley and L.C.'s maternal aunt, Kimmy, each asked L.C. if Truesdale had an inappropriate relationship with her. L.C. denied it both times.

[7] The sexual fondling and oral sex continued after L.C. turned eighteen in late 2010, but stopped by April 2011. After L.C. graduated from high school in June 2011, she moved to live with her father, Steve, and stepmother, Dawn. In January 2012, when L.C. was nineteen years old, she disclosed the sexual abuse to Dawn and then made a police report. Owen County Sheriff's Department Deputy Darin Crum (“Deputy Crum”) interviewed L.C., Anna, and other family members as part of the investigation. Also in February 2012, a trained child forensic interviewer interviewed L.C.

[8] On May 30, 2012, the State charged Truesdale with two counts of Sexual Misconduct with a Minor, as Class B felonies (Counts 1 and 2); one count of Sexual Misconduct with a Minor, as a Class C felony (Count 3); and three counts of Child Seduction, as Class D felonies (Counts 4 through 6).⁵

[9] On August 29, 2014, Truesdale filed with the trial court a notice of intent to offer evidence that L.C. made a prior false accusation of sexual abuse. Truesdale also filed a motion in limine, seeking to exclude a statement Truesdale made to Anna that he had engaged in sexual activity with L.C. The trial court first heard evidence and argument on the motions on October 31, 2014 and held a second hearing on November 26, 2014. The court then denied both motions.

[10] On January 22 and 23, 2015, a jury trial was held, at the conclusion of which the jury found Truesdale guilty of all charges. On February 23, 2015, the court sentenced Truesdale to an aggregate term of thirty years in the Indiana Department of Correction, with five years suspended to probation. Truesdale now appeals his convictions.

Discussion and Decision

Prior False Accusation

[11] Truesdale first argues that the trial court erred in excluding evidence that T.C. made a prior false accusation of sexual abuse.

[12] Under Indiana Evidence Rule 412, commonly known as the Rape Shield Rule, evidence of a victim's or witness's prior sexual conduct is generally inadmissible, subject to a few delineated exceptions. Evidence that a complaining witness made prior false accusations of rape does not, however, constitute prior sexual conduct under Rule 412. State v. Walton, 715 N.E.2d 824, 826 (Ind.1999). Because such evidence is offered for impeachment purposes to show the complaining witness previously made false accusations of sexual misconduct, the evidence is more properly understood as verbal, not sexual, conduct. Id. at 826–27.

[13] Evidence of prior false accusations of sexual misconduct may be admitted if (1) the complaining witness admits he or she made a prior false accusation, or (2) the accusation is demonstrably false. Id. at 828 (citing Stewart v. State, 531 N.E.2d 1146, 1149 (Ind.1988.) “Prior accusations are demonstrably false where the victim has admitted the falsity of the charges or they have been disproved.” Candler v. State, 837 N.E.2d 1100, 1103 (Ind.Ct.App.2005), reh'g denied. Generally, where the admission of evidence is predicated on a factual determination by the trial court, we review the court's ruling under a clearly erroneous standard. Id.

[14] In this case, L.C. did not admit to making a prior false accusation of sexual abuse.⁶ Truesdale submitted as an offer of proof Anna's deposition testimony that L.C. accused a neighbor of improperly touching her when she was approximately seven or eight years old. Anna testified that L.C. later admitted the allegation was a lie and apologized to Anna for lying about it. Anna thought some investigation occurred, but was unsure of which authorities were involved. Anna also stated that as a result of L.C.'s allegation, the family attended therapy sessions together.

[15] In response, the State introduced testimony from Sonya Seymour, a local office director for the Department of Child Services (“DCS”), whose search of DCS's statewide database yielded no abuse reports involving L.C. during the relevant time period. Dan McBride, an investigator for the Owen County Prosecutor's Office, also testified that he did not find any Hendricks County⁷ law enforcement reports involving sexual abuse allegations made by L.C. during that time frame. The State also offered prospective testimony from L.C.'s father, Steve, that the therapist L.C. saw after the prior allegation “indicated to him that [the therapist] felt like something had happened to [L.C.], but [L.C.] was not forthcoming about what and [the therapist's] ability to help her as a result of that was limited.” (Tr. 70.)⁸ The trial court accepted the proffered statement by agreement of the parties. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court held that Truesdale's evidence of L.C.'s prior allegation should be excluded, finding simply “I'm not even sure it was made.” (Tr. 75.)⁹

[16] Here, Anna's testimony did not establish when, whether, and to whom L.C.'s alleged prior accusation was made. There were no DCS or police reports of the alleged abuse. Moreover, there was conflicting testimony as to whether L.C. lied about the allegation or merely was not “forthcoming” about the details. Based on this evidence, Truesdale failed to show that L.C. made a prior allegation, disavowed a prior allegation, or that the allegation was demonstrably false. See Fugett v. State, 812 N.E.2d 846, 849–50 (Ind.Ct.App.2004) (holding that trial court did not err in excluding evidence that child molesting victim made a prior false allegation where there was conflicting testimony about the prior allegation and no police report of it).

[17] The trial court did not err in excluding Truesdale's evidence that L.C. allegedly made a prior false accusation of sexual abuse.

Truesdale's Statement

[18] Truesdale next contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion in limine and abused its discretion in admitting at trial his statement to Anna that he had sexual contact with L.C.

[19] A trial court's ruling upon a motion in limine is not reviewable upon appeal. Akins v. State, 429 N.E.2d 232, 237 (Ind.1981). The purpose of a motion in limine is not...