State v. Smith
743 So. 2d 199 (1999)
Rule of Law:
Evidence that a victim has made prior false allegations of sexual molestation is intended to impeach credibility, not to prove the victim's 'past sexual behavior,' and is therefore not barred by Louisiana's rape shield statute, La. C.E. art. 412.
Facts:
- The alleged victim, a twelve-year-old girl, told a friend of her mother that her grandmother's husband, Eual Howard Smith, Jr., had touched her inappropriately over a period of several years.
- She claimed the incidents began when she was four or five years old and included Smith rubbing her buttocks, touching her bare breasts, and touching her vaginal area over her clothes.
- There was no physical evidence of sexual abuse to corroborate the victim's claims.
- The victim had previously accused her cousin, T.S., of sexual molestation.
- Another cousin, M.S., was prepared to testify that after the victim accused T.S., and T.S. denied it, the victim returned and told T.S. she was 'just joking.'
Procedural Posture:
- The State of Louisiana prosecuted Eual Howard Smith, Jr. in a Louisiana trial court for attempted indecent behavior with a juvenile.
- During trial, the court held a hearing under La. C.E. art. 412 and ruled that the defense could not introduce evidence of the victim's prior, allegedly false accusation of molestation against her cousin.
- A jury found Smith guilty of the charged offense.
- Smith, as appellant, appealed to the Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal.
- The court of appeal, as appellee, affirmed the trial court's conviction.
- Smith, as applicant, petitioned the Supreme Court of Louisiana for a writ of certiorari, which was granted.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does Louisiana's rape shield statute, La. C.E. art. 412, which generally bars evidence of a victim's past sexual behavior, apply to evidence that the victim has made prior false allegations of sexual molestation when offered to impeach the victim's credibility?
Opinions:
Majority - Traylor, J.
No. Louisiana's rape shield statute, La. C.E. art. 412, does not apply to evidence of prior false allegations of sexual molestation because such evidence relates to the victim's credibility, not their 'past sexual behavior.' The purpose of Article 412 is to prevent the introduction of a victim's sexual history or reputation for chastity. Evidence of prior false allegations is not offered to prove the victim engaged in sexual activity, but rather to show a 'general scheme to make false charges' and to challenge the victim's truthfulness. Therefore, the trial court erred by applying the rape shield statute and holding a hearing to determine for itself whether the prior allegations were actually false. The court overrules the precedent set in State v. Allen, which suggested such a hearing was necessary. The proper standard is for the judge to determine only if a reasonable juror could find the prior allegations were false, not to make that credibility determination themselves.
Dissenting - Victory, J.
The dissenting justice would have excluded the evidence under a different rule, Article 403 of the Louisiana Code of Evidence. This suggests a belief that even if the evidence is not barred by the rape shield law, its potential for unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, or misleading the jury substantially outweighs its probative value.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies the scope of Louisiana's rape shield law, creating a clear distinction between a victim's sexual history (which is protected) and their history of making similar allegations (which pertains to credibility). By overruling prior precedent from State v. Allen, the court strengthens a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation and impeachment, particularly in cases that hinge solely on credibility with no physical evidence. The ruling lowers the bar for admissibility of such evidence, shifting the ultimate credibility determination from the judge (in a pre-trial hearing) to the jury (during trial). This precedent will likely lead to more frequent attempts by defense counsel to introduce evidence of prior allegedly false accusations in sexual assault cases.
Gunnerbot
AI-powered case assistant
Loaded: State v. Smith (1999)
Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"