Not-Guilty Verdict After Conviction Overturned on Appeal
State: Kansas
Court: Labette County District Court
Case Name: State v. R.C.
Lead Attorney: Tom Pavlinic
Co-counsel: Melanie S. Morgan
Judge: Jeffry L. Jack
Date: May 01, 2015
Result: Jury Verdict – Not Guilty on All Counts
When our client was only eighteen years old, he started dating a girl who had two young daughters, then ages one and two. They had an on-again off-again relationship for a number of years. In 2007, they purchased a home together, and the daughters moved in with them permanently. Shortly after moving in together, both daughters accused him of having sexually abused them. Although they made allegations of sexual touching, they both denied any penetration. At first, the girls’ mother supported him, but she then turned against him.
Law enforcement did not conduct a very thorough investigation and moved forward primarily on the girls’ allegations. Our client was arrested and went to trial in August 2009. As part of its evidence at the 2009 trial, the prosecutor presented the testimony of a nurse who displayed photographs of both girls’ hymens and testified that they were obliterated. She also displayed pictures of normal hymens, leaving the jury with the impression that there must have been some abuse. Our client was convicted, sentenced to 14 years and required to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life. He served almost four years before his conviction was overturned on appeal. The court released him on an increased bail pending the second trial.
Efforts to resolve the case without a second trial were not successful. The defense offered to accept a plea to time served. The state demanded a sentence of 9 years. Our client rejected the state’s offer and went to trial.
In 2016, Tom was brought in by our client and his family to serve as co-counsel at the retrial — nearly 6 years after the charges were first brought. He worked with one of the original attorneys who had tried the case in 2009, Melanie Morgan, who was very effective in cross-examining the investigating agent at the second trial and exposing the lack of any meaningful investigation. It was obvious when the cross examination was complete, that there had been a rush to judgment.
In addition, the defense took a different approach with the evidence. Since the medical evidence (obliterated hymens) did not comport to the girls’ allegations (touching but no penetration), we brought in a gynecologist who testified that there must have been some penetration, and that the medical evidence was not consistent with the allegations. The defense then displayed the evidence used by the state in its first trial, but not utilized in the second. Tom and Melanie pointed out to the jury that it was the defense who presented the medical evidence that was collected by the state.
There was some evidence that the mother accused a member of her family of abuse. This testimony was not admitted at the first trial but was in the second. As part of the criminal investigation, the social worker and the investigating law enforcement officer recorded video statements from each of the girls, all of which were played for the jury at trial (for over 1.5 hours) despite the girls’ having testified. The defense included a Power Point presentation in its closing argument that outlined all of the reasonable doubt generated by not only the evidence but also the lack of evidence. The jury deliberated less than two hours before finding our client not guilty of all counts.
Not-Guilty Verdict Despite Prosecution’s Character Attack
State: Maryland
Court: Circuit Court for Frederick County
Case Name: State v. J.B.
Lead Attorney: Tom Pavlinic
Judge: Theresa M. Adams
Date: February 24, 2015
Result: Jury Verdict – Not Guilty on All 6 Counts
The State charged our client with 5 counts of second degree rape, 2 counts of second degree sex offense, 1 count of third degree sex offense and 1 count of assault. One count of rape and the third degree sex offense and assault counts were dismissed prior to trial. The only plea offer the state made was 40 years with all but 20 years suspended. Because the charges are deemed to be crimes of violence under Maryland law, the client would have had to serve a minimum of 10 years before even being eligible for parole. The plea was rejected.
The case lasted 5 full days and presented some challenging issues for the defense. Before retaining counsel, the client gave a 2-hour video interview with law enforcement. During the interrogation, he lied about taking pictures and his past association over many years with the complainant who had a limited IQ. The evidence also established that he was married and having an affair with the complainant’s mother. During closing argument, the defense readily conceded he lied to the police, committed adultery and displayed morally objectionable behavior, This conduct, though, did not make him a rapist. Three solid character witnesses testified as to his being peaceful, kind and non-violent. The jury returned its not guilty verdicts on all counts after 7 hours of deliberation.
Not-Guilty Verdict After Two Previous Hung Jury Trials
State: Texas
Court: 380th Judicial District Court (Collin County)
Case Name: Texas v. C.D.
Lead Attorney: Tom Pavlinic
Co-counsel: Heather Barbieri
Judge: Keith Dean
Date: March 2014
Result: Not Guilty (Jury Trial) ALL COUNTS
Our client was charged in Collin County Texas with nine counts of Indecency with a Child through sexual contact, which are second degree felonies each carrying a potential sentence of a minimum of two to a maximum of twenty years of incarceration.
The facts were nothing short of bizarre. His stepdaughter accused him of touching her breast one time and her vagina one time in 2003 for “a few seconds” when she was 7 years old. The alleged abuse stopped completely for three years until the family moved into a new home. She then said that there were additional incidents of touching that lasted only seconds when she was between 11 and 15. In the first two trials, the specific incidents were not tied to any specific year or date. She reported the abuse in 2011, when she was 15 years old, and her mom and stepfather were arguing about divorce.
Heather Barbieri, one of our Group attorneys, represented the client on two trials that resulted in mistrials in 2012 and 2013. The jury vote at the first trial was 6 to 6, but 11 to 1 for Guilty at the second trial. When the DA elected to try the case for the third time, Heather asked Attorney Pavlinic to work with her.
At the third trial, the complainant now claimed there were three acts of touching in the new house that lasted a “few seconds.” This time, however, she said one act of touching took place in each of the years 2007, 2008 and 2009. (We believe she testified with this specificity to meet the conditions of the indictment.) There were also texts showing that the mother demanded money, or she was going to call the police.
Over repeated defense objections, the court permitted the prosecution to call two representatives from the Child Advocacy Center to testify about the characteristics of abused children and their alleged abusers, even though they were not qualified as experts and their testimony was not relevant to the facts of the case. Further, the second expert was able to testify after the defense rested, even though that testimony was not proper rebuttal.
The court granted the defense’s motion to strike 4 of the 9 counts because there was no testimony that any alleged abuse occurred during those years. After nearly 10 hours of deliberation, the jury returned not guilty verdicts on the 5 remaining counts of the Indictment.
