STATE v. DANILO DENNY ARTEZ

Minnesota Supreme Court1970-03-26No. No. 41412

286 Minn. 545176 N.W.2d 81

Summary · law.co

Holding. The court affirmed the conviction for carnal knowledge of a child, finding the evidence sufficient to support the verdict and the laboratory test results properly admissible.

An 81-year-old defendant was convicted of carnal knowledge of a 14-year-old girl whom he employed. The victim testified that the defendant lured her to a residence, forced her to wear a bathing suit, and coerced her into sexual intercourse through threats of violence, leaving visible bruises and marks on her body. She reported the incident to her parents the following morning and was examined at a hospital, where medical evidence documented bruises on her arm and collarbone, and laboratory testing confirmed the presence of sperm cells consistent with intercourse occurring within 72 hours.

The defendant challenged both the sufficiency of evidence supporting the conviction and the court's admission of laboratory test results. The court found that although corroboration in the case was not robust, it was sufficient to sustain the conviction. Medical testimony confirming bruising supported the defendant's use of force, and the victim's disclosure to family members the day after the incident, while delayed, provided additional corroboration. Regarding the laboratory evidence, the court determined that the test results were properly admitted because the defendant's objection rested solely on remoteness rather than foundational or hearsay defects, and the examining physician adequately testified about her findings.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Sufficiency of evidence to support sexual abuse conviction of a minor
Adequacy of corroboration in child sexual abuse prosecution
Admissibility of laboratory evidence in sexual assault cases
Significance of delayed victim disclosure in abuse cases

Procedural posture

The defendant appealed from a conviction for carnal knowledge of a child, raising challenges to the evidentiary basis of the conviction and the trial court's evidentiary rulings.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

majority opinion

Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from a conviction for carnal knowledge of a child in violation of Minn. St. 1965, § 617.02. The issues raised by defendant are (1) the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, and (2) the propriety of receiving into evidence testimony concerning a laboratory test.

At the time of the offense, Margaret, the victim, was 14 years of age, and defendant 81 years old. Margaret testified that on March 24, 1967, she was employed by defendant in a magazine publication business. On that day he persuaded her to accompany him to a residence where he insisted she don a bathing suit and pose as a model. While she was dressing, he seized her and threatened to choke her if she resisted his act of intercourse with her. In the process he inflicted bruises on her arm and left marks on her neck. Thereafter, defendant and Margaret were driven back to the office by another employee. She remained there for some time and arrived home about 7 p. m. Without advising her parents of what had transpired, she left after dinner to babysit for the evening. Her first complaint to a parent occurred the next morning. She was thereupon examined at Hennepin County General Hospital where a laboratory test revealed “numerous nonmotile sperm cells present.” Bruises were found on Margaret’s right arm and over her left clavicle. Her hymen was intact.

In prosecutions for sexual violation of minors, we have stressed the importance of corroboration. State v. Anderson, 272 Minn. 384, 137 N. W. (2d) 781; State v. Butenhoff, 279 Minn. 177, 155 N. W. (2d) 894. While the failure of a victim to complain is of critical significance in a prosecution for rape where it is accomplished by violence or threat of violence, such proof is not essential where as here defendant is charged only with carnal knowledge of a child. It was the jury’s prerogative to discredit her claim of violence and treat it as a fabricated justification for illicit, voluntary intercourse. If there was consent as the charge alleged, it would be more natural to conceal the illicit relationship than to reveal it. In any case, these were questions which the jury could decide either way.

The corroboration in the instant case is not strong, but we believe it is adequate to support a conviction. Not only did defendant have an opportunity to commit the offense but the medical testimony confirms the fact that force was used. While Margaret’s disclosure to her family was tardy, it did occur the following day.

With respect to the admissibility of the laboratory test, it is enough to say that the objection was based on remoteness. No question of foundation or hearsay was presented. The doctor who examined Margaret confirmed the presence of bruises and interpreted the laboratory test to establish that she had had sexual intercourse within a period of 72 hours of the time the test was taken. We do not accept the contention that under these circumstances the court had a duty sua sponte to exclude the results of the test without proper objection, merely because the state did not show how the test was conducted.

Affirmed.

Repealed by L. 1967, c. 507, § 12.