IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

Assigned on Briefs December 1, 2020

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JIMMIE LIDDELL

Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County

No. 17-05045 Lee V. Coffee, Judge

No. W2020-00235-CCA-R3-CD

The Defendant, Jimmie Liddell, was convicted by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of 

four counts of aggravated sexual battery, a Class B felony; one count of attempted 

aggravated sexual battery, a Class C felony; and one count of solicitation of aggravated 

sexual battery, a Class C felony. See T.C.A. §§ 39-13-504 (2018) (aggravated sexual 

battery), 39-12-101 (2018) (criminal attempt), 39-13-528 (2018) (solicitation of a person 

under eighteen years of age). The trial court imposed an effective sentence of 110 years. 

On appeal, the Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his 

convictions. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgments of the Criminal Court Affirmed

ROBERT H. MONTGOMERY, JR., J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which JAMES 

CURWOOD WITT, JR., and TIMOTHY L. EASTER, JJ., joined.

Phyllis Aluko (on appeal and at trial), District Public Defender; and Tony N. Brayton (on 

appeal) and Mark K. Kent (at trial), Assistant District Public Defenders, for the Appellant, 

Jimmie Liddell.

Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Ronald L. Coleman, Assistant 

Attorney General; Amy P. Weirich, District Attorney General; Dru Carpenter, Assistant 

District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

OPINION

The Defendant’s convictions relate to the sexual abuse of six children at a gathering

on April 9, 2016, at the apartment shared by the Defendant and his brother. 

04/28/2021
-2-

At the trial, Shannon Hamer testified that she was the mother of five children, 

including three of the victims: J.S., K.C., and J.H.1 She stated the ages of each of these 

victims, all of whom were under age thirteen on April 9, 2016. 

Ms. Hamer testified that in April 2016, she and the Defendant had been restaurant 

coworkers and had known each other for about one year. She said they had been friends 

and that they socialized in each other’s apartments, which were within the same complex. 

She said the Defendant and the Defendant’s brother lived together.

Ms. Hamer testified that she had worked on April 9, 2016, and that the Defendant 

had requested and received a day off. She said her husband was babysitting three children 

of family friends. These children were victims R.C.1, R.C.2, and R.C.3. Ms. Hamer said 

her husband was also caring for their children and had planned to take all the children to a 

park. She said that a couple of hours into her work shift, she learned from her husband that 

the Defendant and the Defendant’s brother had invited her husband and the children to their 

apartment.

Ms. Hamer testified that she went to the Defendant’s apartment around 7:30 to 7:45 

p.m. She said several children were present. She identified the adults present as Ebony

Isom, the Defendant, the Defendant’s brother, and Ms. Hamer’s husband. She said her 

husband was grilling food and walked between the apartment and the grill outside. She 

said the Defendant’s brother sat on the living room couch with one of her children. She 

said that two children played outside and that R.C.1, R.C.2, R.C.3, K.C., J.S., J.H., and 

C.H. were in the Defendant’s bedroom playing video games with the Defendant. She said 

R.C.1 sat on the Defendant’s lap. She said she did not see anything unusual or notice the 

Defendant’s clothing being “unfastened or half off.”

Ms. Hamer testified that the children were “rambunctious” and that her family, 

R.C.1, R.C.2, and R.C.3 only stayed thirty minutes to one hour after she arrived. She said

that she worked with the Defendant a few times after April 9, 2016, and that around this 

time, the Defendant asked if her son J.H. could stay overnight at his apartment. She said

she refused because J.H. was age eight at the time and because the Defendant did not have 

children of his own.

Ms. Hamer testified that around April 14, 2016, she spoke with the parents of R.C.1, 

R.C.2, and R.C.3. Ms. Hamer said she also spoke with her children. She said Ms. Isom 

and her son came to Ms. Hamer’s apartment along with the family which included R.C.1, 

R.C.2, and R.C.3. Ms. Hamer said the police were called. She said she took her children 

to the Child Advocacy Center for interviews about one month later.

 

1 We identify the victims of sexual abuse by their initials.
-3-

J.S., age nine at the time of the trial,2testified that when he was age five, “Jimmie” 

had touched J.S.’s body parts when he and Jimmie were in Jimmie’s bedroom. J.S. said 

other adults, including his parents, were in the apartment at the time. J.S. said that he and 

Jimmie were in Jimmie’s bedroom alone, that Jimmie told J.S. to sit on Jimmie’s lap, and 

that Jimmie touched J.S.’s “private” with Jimmie’s hand. J.S. marked an anatomical 

diagram to show where Jimmie touched him, and the diagram was received as an exhibit. 

The diagram showed circles on the genital and buttocks areas of a child. J.S. said Jimmie

touched him in the areas indicated on the diagram under J.S.’s clothes.

J.S. testified that he saw Jimmie inappropriately touch J.H., R.C.1, R.C.2, and R.C.3

in Jimmie’s bedroom on the same date. J.S. said each of the children sat on Jimmie’s lap 

when the inappropriate touchings occurred. When asked what parts of the other children’s 

bodies Jimmie touched, J.S. said, “The same.” J.S. said that he was not in the room when 

Jimmie touched the other children but that J.S. saw it because he was “[i]n the doorway.” 

J.S. said that when he saw Jimmie inappropriately touch J.H., Jimmie and J.H. were alone 

together in Jimmie’s bedroom.

J.S. testified that he told his mother the same day about the incident, that the police 

were called, and that he and his family went home. J.S. said he was interviewed about the 

incident. He identified a disc containing a recording of the interview, which was received 

as an exhibit. In the recording, J.S. stated the following: He was in “Uncle Jimmie’s room”

when Uncle Jimmie “kept digging in [J.S.’s] pants” with Uncle Jimmie’s hand and “kept 

touching [J.S.’s] body parts.” Referring to a diagram, J.S. identified his buttocks and 

genital area as the places Uncle Jimmie touched. J.S. said Uncle Jimmie moved his hand 

when he touched J.S.’s buttocks and genital area and that Uncle Jimmie’s hand stayed 

outside his buttocks. J.S. said that Uncle Jimmie sat in a chair and that J.S. sat in Uncle 

Jimmie’s lap as the touching occurred. J.S. said that J.H. also sat in Uncle Jimmie’s lap 

and that Uncle Jimmie “did the same thing” to J.H. as he had done to J.S. J.S. said that 

R.C.1, R.C.2, R.C.3, and another child who was not a subject of the indictment in this case 

also sat in Uncle Jimmie’s lap and that Uncle Jimmie did “the same thing” to them. J.S. 

said that other children were in the room playing video games when Uncle Jimmie touched 

him. J.S. said he told his parents about the incident the same day it happened.

J.H., age twelve at the time of the trial, testified that he went to the Defendant’s 

apartment once. J.H. said that the children played video games in the Defendant’s bedroom 

and went in and out of the room, with some of them going outside periodically. J.H. said 

that while he and the Defendant sat on the Defendant’s bed, the Defendant told him that 

when J.H. was ready, J.H. could “stick . . . [his] penis in [the Defendant’s] butt.” J.H. said

 

2 The trial took place in August 2019.
-4-

that the Defendant told J.H. to kiss the Defendant and that the Defendant “forcefully 

grabbed” J.H.’s head and kissed J.H.’s mouth. J.H. said J.S., R.C.1, R.C.2, R.C.3, and K.C. 

were in the room when this occurred. J.H. said that while J.H. sat in a chair in front of the 

Defendant, the Defendant asked J.H. to “sit closer to” the Defendant’s penis. J.H. said he 

scooted forward in the chair to get away from the Defendant and moved to sit in the floor. 

J.H. said that K.C. and J.S. were in the room when the Defendant tried to get J.H. to sit 

closer to the Defendant’s penis and that he thought R.C.1, R.C.2, and R.C.3 had been in 

the room, also.

J.H. testified that while he was in the Defendant’s bedroom, he thought the 

Defendant “sticked his . . . fingers in [K.C.’s and J.S.’s] butts.” J.H. based his opinion on 

his having seen the Defendant’s thumb “poking out of” K.C.’s and J.S.’s pants and not 

having seen the rest of the Defendant’s hand. J.H. said that when he saw the Defendant’s 

hand in K.C.’s pants, the Defendant was sitting in a chair and K.C. stood in front of the 

chair. J.H. said that the Defendant asked K.C. to sit on the Defendant’s lap but that J.H. 

told K.C. “no.” J.H. said that when he saw the Defendant’s hand in J.S.’s pants, J.S. sat on 

the Defendant’s lap. J.H. said the other adults were in the kitchen when he observed these 

events. J.H. said that before the Defendant put his hands in K.C.’s and J.S.’s pants, the 

Defendant told J.S. to bring the Defendant a container of baby oil, which the Defendant 

applied to his finger. 

J.H. testified that after he and J.S. ate, they were in the Defendant’s bedroom with 

the Defendant and that the Defendant again asked J.S. to sit on the Defendant’s lap. J.H. 

said the Defendant “tried to stick his fingers in [J.H.’s] butt.”

J.H. testified that the Defendant had been clothed and that the Defendant’s pants 

had been zipped during these events. When asked if the Defendant’s pants had been 

unzipped at any point, J.H. said, “No, I don’t remember. I don’t know.”

J.H. testified that he told his parents about what happened after R.C.1, R.C.2, and 

R.C.3 told their parents. J.H. said he thought this happened the day after they had been at 

the Defendant’s apartment. J.H. said that the adults were mad and that the police were 

called. 

J.H. testified that the adults drank alcohol at the Defendant’s apartment. J.H. said 

he thought the Defendant tried to get the other adults drunk so the adults would check on 

the children less frequently.

J.H. identified a disc containing the recording of his forensic interview. The disc 

was received as an exhibit. In the interview, J.H. stated the following: A “gay dude”

named “Jimmie,” who used to work with J.H.’s mother, tried to make J.H. “get gay.” J.H. 

said that Jimmie said he liked boys and girls, that Jimmie told J.H. to kiss him on the mouth, 
-5-

that J.H. ignored Jimmie, and that Jimmie grabbed J.H.’s head and kissed J.H. “on the lips.” 

J.H. said Jimmie “almost broke [J.H.’s] concentration” on a video game when Jimmie said, 

“Sit on my lap,” and “Sit on my d---.” J.H. said that he had been sitting in a chair with 

Jimmie, who sat behind J.H., that Jimmie touched J.H.’s waist with Jimmie’s “middle 

part,” and that J.H. scooted forward in the chair and moved to the floor after Jimmie said, 

“Sit on my d---.” J.H. said J.S. sat on Jimmie’s lap after J.H. moved to the floor. J.H. said 

that Jimmie told J.H. that when J.H. was ready, J.H. could “stick his dingaling in [Jimmie’s] 

butt.” J.H. said Jimmie told all of the children to sit on Jimmie’s lap. J.H. said some 

children complied and some scooted forward or sat on the floor. J.H. said that Jimmie 

stuck Jimmie’s fingers in J.S.’s and K.C.’s butts, and tried to make J.H.’s cousins, brothers, 

and sisters sit on his lap. J.H. said Jimmie had J.S. retrieve “grease” from the bathroom, 

which Jimmie put on Jimmie’s fingers before inserting them in J.S.’s and K.C.’s butts. J.H. 

said that Jimmie told the children, “Don’t tell anyone,” that the adults were outside or in 

the kitchen, and that Jimmie tried to get the adults drunk. 

R.C.3, age 13 at the time of the trial, testified that she and her two brothers spent the 

night with family friends the night before the events that occurred at the Defendant’s 

apartment. R.C.3 said she and her brothers went to the Defendant’s apartment with the 

family friends. She said that when she was introduced to the Defendant, he hugged her 

and touched her “behind.” She said that after eating, she and the other children played 

video games in a bedroom. She said that the Defendant was in the room and that he 

inappropriately touched the children. She said the Defendant asked all the children to kiss 

him. She said the Defendant told the children “not to tell nobody what had happened.” 

She said the Defendant gave her liquor, “slid his hand down [her] back trying to touch [her] 

behind,” and made her brothers “do other things.” She said the Defendant was unable to 

touch her “behind” because she left the room.

R.C.3 testified that the Defendant told R.C.2 to kiss the Defendant, that R.C.2 kissed 

the Defendant’s cheek, that the Defendant told R.C.2 to give the Defendant a “real kiss,” 

and that R.C.2 kissed the Defendant’s lips. She said that the Defendant made R.C.2 sit on 

the Defendant’s lap and that she did not see “anything happen” while R.C.2 sat on the 

Defendant’s lap. She said she did not see anything involving the Defendant and the 

children other than R.C.2. She said she was in and out of the room and that some of the 

other children remained in the room to play video games.

R.C.3 testified that after they went home and before they went to bed, the children 

talked about the Defendant’s having touched them inappropriately. She said that the 

children continued to discuss the Defendant’s actions and that she and her brothers told 

their father three days after the gathering about the Defendant’s actions. She said they did 

not report it sooner because the Defendant told them not to tell anyone. 
-6-

R.C.3 identified a disc containing her forensic interview. The disc was received as 

an exhibit. In the interview, R.C.3 stated the following: A man named “Jimmie” put his 

hand behind her neck and tried to touch her “behind” when she was at his apartment. She 

said “all the children” were in Jimmie’s room playing with an Xbox and that Jimmie tried 

to touch all of them. She said Jimmie kissed R.C.2. She said that Jimmie tried to touch 

her butt but that she moved to the floor. She said that Jimmie wanted her to kiss him but 

that she said, “No.” She said that Jimmie asked R.C.2 to sit beside him and that Jimmie 

kissed R.C.2 on the lips. She said Jimmie tried to kiss and touch the other children. She 

said she saw R.C.1 sit on Jimmie’s lap after Jimmie said, “Come sit right here,” and that 

she saw Jimmie touch R.C.1’s butt with Jimmie’s hand. R.C.3 said that the children 

reported the abuse three days later and that the police were called.

R.C.1, age ten, testified that when he was age seven, he was at his parents’ friends’ 

house with his siblings and his “cousins.” He said that he was at “Nick and Shannon’s” 

house, that they did not go to anyone else’s house, and that they had a barbecue. He said 

that while he played video games, a man he had never met previously and whose name he 

did not remember touched him on his “middle part” and his “behind” underneath his 

clothes and kissed him on his lips. R.C.1 said J.H., J.S., K.C., and C.H. were present when

this occurred. R.C.1 said the adults were in another room when this occurred. R.C.1 said

he told his parents about the events a few days later. He said he did not reveal it initially 

because the man told him to keep it a secret. 

R.C.1 identified a disc containing a video recording of his forensic interview, and 

the disc was received as an exhibit. The recording reflects that R.C.1 stated the following: 

A man whose name R.C.1 did not recall touched R.C.1’s “middle part” and “behind” inside 

R.C.1’s clothes with the man’s hand. R.C.1 said the man told R.C.1 to kiss him and sit on 

his lap. R.C.1 said he kissed the man “on the mouth” and sat on the man’s lap. R.C.1 said 

this occurred while he played games in the living room at “Nick and Shannon’s house.” 

R.C.1 said the man lived beside Nick and Shannon. R.C.1 said that the man asked R.C.1

to touch the man’s middle part but that R.C.1 did not. R.C.1 said the man also touched 

J.H.’s middle part and behind. R.C.1 said that the man asked R.C.2 to “stick his tongue 

down” the man’s throat but that R.C.2 did not. R.C.1 said he saw the man touch all of the 

children’s middle parts and behinds. He identified the other children present as R.C.2, 

R.C.3, J.H., K.C., and two children who were not identified as victims in the indictment.

R.C.2, age eleven, testified that when he was age eight, he was at an apartment with 

his siblings, his friends, his friends’ parents, a man named “Jimmie,” and Jimmie’s brother. 

R.C.2 said the children played video games in Jimmie’s bedroom, while the adults other 

than the Defendant cooked. R.C.2 said Jimmie “was sexually touching” the children, 

including R.C.2. R.C.2 said Jimmie touched them “in our posterior” and made them kiss 

him and put their tongues in his mouth. R.C.2 said he meant “behind” when he said 

“posterior.”
-7-

R.C.2 testified that Jimmie told him to kiss Jimmie and to put his tongue in Jimmie’s 

mouth. R.C.2 said he complied. R.C.2 said that Jimmie told him to sit on Jimmie’s lap, 

that he complied, and that Jimmie’s pants were unzipped when he sat on Jimmie’s lap. 

R.C.2 said that when he sat on Jimmie’s lap, he sat in a chair with Jimmie and that he was 

“in between” Jimmie’s legs. R.C.2 said Jimmie touched R.C.2’s posterior with Jimmie’s 

hands. R.C.2 said he saw Jimmie touch all of the other children “on their posterior.” R.C.2 

thought Jimmie told all of the other children to kiss Jimmie. R.C.2 said that the children 

walked in and out of the room and that he was never alone with Jimmie. R.C.2 said he told 

his mother about the events about three or four days later. He said he did not tell anyone 

sooner because he was scared. 

R.C.2 identified a disc containing his forensic interview, and the disc was received 

as an exhibit. In the interview, R.C.2 stated the following: He, R.C.1, and R.C.3 visited 

at their friends’ house and went to Jimmie’s house to play games. He said Jimmie touched 

his, R.C.1’s, and R.C.3’s private parts but did not touch his or R.C.1’s penises or R.C.3’s 

vagina. R.C.2 said Jimmie touched his posterior more than once on top of R.C.2’s clothes. 

R.C.2 said that Jimmie told the children to hug and kiss him and that they hugged him but 

did not kiss him. R.C.2 said that he, J.H., K.C., J.S., R.C.1, R.C.3, and three children not 

identified as victims in the indictment played games in Jimmie’s “room” and that Jimmie 

asked the children to sit in his lap. R.C.2 said that Jimmie’s pants were unzipped but that 

he did not “see anything.” R.C.2 said Jimmie touched R.C.1’s posterior and penis more 

than once. R.C.2 said Jimmie touched R.C.3’s posterior. R.C.2 said Jimmie touched 

K.C.’s posterior inside her clothes as she sat on Jimmie’s lap. R.C.2 said Jimmie touched 

J.S.’s penis and posterior outside J.S.’s clothes. R.C.2 said Jimmie asked R.C.2 and J.H. 

to “stick [their] tongues down” Jimmie’s throat. R.C.2 said Jimmie asked the children to 

kiss him and that R.C.2, J.S., and R.C.1 kissed Jimmie. R.C.2 said the children waited four 

days to report Jimmie’s actions. 

Ramon Callicutt, Sr., testified that he had three children and that he was married to 

Rosalyn Callicutt. He said his family used to live next door to the Hamer family and had 

remained friends. Mr. Callicutt said that when he and his wife worked overnight, their 

children stayed with the Hamer family and that he and his wife sometimes babysat the 

Hamer children. Mr. Callicutt said the Hamers were no longer his neighbors in April 2016, 

when the events relevant to this case occurred.

Mr. Callicutt testified that he met the Defendant at the Hamers’ apartment. Mr. 

Callicutt identified the Defendant in the courtroom. 

Mr. Callicutt testified that he dropped off his children with Nicholas Hamer on the 

afternoon of April 9, 2016, because the Hamers were going to babysit while Mr. Callicutt 

and his wife worked. Mr. Callicutt agreed that he took the children to the Defendant’s 
-8-

apartment, which was in the same complex as the Hamers’ apartment, at the direction of 

Mr. Hamer. Mr. Callicutt said that Mr. Hamer, the Hamer children, and the Defendant 

were present when Mr. Callicutt dropped off the Callicutt children.

Mr. Callicutt testified that after he completed work, he returned to the Defendant’s 

apartment around 8:00 or 9:00 p.m. Mr. Callicutt said that Mr. Hamer, the Defendant, Ms. 

Hamer, and people he did not know were present. Mr. Callicutt said that the adults talked 

outside and that the children watched television in a back room. Mr. Callicutt said that he, 

his children, and the Hamers left the Defendant’s apartment and went to the Hamers’ 

apartment at an unidentified point, that Mr. Callicutt went home late, and that Mr. 

Callicutt’s children spent the night with the Hamers.

Mr. Callicutt testified that he learned a day or two later from his wife that 

“something had happened at the barbecue.” Mr. Callicutt said the children talked to his 

wife but did not relate the events directly to him. Mr. Callicutt said he and his wife met 

with the Hamers about the situation. Mr. Callicutt said that “Ebony” stayed with the 

children while Mr. Callicutt, Ms. Callicut, Mr. Hamer, and Ms. Hamer went to the 

Defendant’s apartment. Mr. Callicutt said the situation became heated at the Defendant’s 

apartment, that the neighbors called the apartment complex’s security guards, and that his 

wife called the police. Mr. Callicutt said he talked to the police officer who responded and 

had no further contact with the Defendant.

Rosalyn Callicutt testified that she had three children: R.C.1, R.C.2, and R.C.3. 

She specified their dates of birth, and all were under age thirteen on April 9, 2016.

Ms. Callicutt testified that she and her family were close friends of the Hamers in 

April 2016. She said the adults babysat each other’s children frequently. 

Ms. Callicutt testified that she was at work on April 9, 2016, when her children went 

to a barbecue with the Hamers. Ms. Callicutt said that her husband had dropped off their 

children with the Hamers on April 8 before he went to work and that the children spent the 

night with the Hamers. Ms. Callicutt said she had been at work and had not attended the 

barbecue.

Ms. Callicutt testified that at some point after the barbecue, her children told her 

about “Jimmie” and “a lot of things [Ms. Callicutt] was just not okay with.” She said that 

her husband was not home at the time and that she called the Hamers immediately. She 

thought the children revealed the information on the night after the barbecue. She said that 

they decided to confront the Defendant but that it was late at night and that she had to work 

the next day. Ms. Callicutt said they planned to confront the Defendant after she finished 

work the next day.
-9-

Ms. Callicutt testified that on the appointed day, she and her husband went with Mr. 

Hamer and Ms. Hamer to the Defendant’s apartment. She said that she worked as an armed 

security guard and that she was in her uniform and armed. She said that they had questions 

for the Defendant and that the atmosphere was “terrible.” Ms. Callicutt said “everybody 

out there . . . wanted something bad to happen to” the Defendant. She said that the 

Defendant’s roommate threatened to call the police and that she called the police. She said 

that she saw an unidentified man hit the Defendant but that it had not been one of the people 

with whom she had gone to the Defendant’s apartment.

Ms. Callicutt testified that she later took her children to the Child Advocacy Center 

for forensic interviews.

Memphis Police Department (MPD) Officer Chantavia Boykin testified that she 

responded to a call involving the Defendant on April 14, 2016. She said that when she 

arrived, a group of irate “complainants and parents” were present and that a heated situation 

existed. She said she learned some children had been “touched by someone.” She said she 

obtained information about the allegations, ensured that the scene was safe, and forwarded 

information about the allegations to a lieutenant, who would forward it to the Sex Crimes 

Unit.

MPD Lieutenant Frankie Bradley testified that she worked in the Juvenile Sex 

Abuse Department of the Sex Crimes Unit in April 2016. In this capacity, she received 

information about allegations pertaining to the Defendant. She said that child victims of 

sexual abuse were referred to the Child Advocacy Center for interviews. 

Lieutenant Bradley testified that she observed K.C.’s forensic interview on May 2. 

2016. Lieutenant Bradley said K.C. did not disclose any sexual abuse.

Nicholas Hamer testified that he was married to Shannon Hamer and that their 

children were J.E., J.H., J.S., K.C., and C.H. Mr. Hamer testified that his family previously 

lived in Memphis and that they had been friends with the Callicutt family, who at one time 

had been their next-door neighbors. Mr. Hamer said he knew the Defendant as one of his 

wife’s coworkers and a neighbor from their time in Memphis. Mr. Hamer said he and the 

Defendant had been “cool” and drank and discussed video games together. Mr. Hamer 

identified the Defendant in the courtroom and identified a photograph of the Defendant.

Mr. Hamer testified that on April 9, 2016, he had planned to have a birthday 

celebration at a park for a couple of his children but that the Defendant invited them to the 

Defendant’s apartment for a barbecue. Mr. Hamer said he went to the Defendant’s 

apartment with his children and the children of family friends. He identified the children 

of the family friends as R.C.1, R.C.2, and R.C.3, whom he said were in his care because 

he was “trying to throw a party” and because their parents were working that day.
-10-

Mr. Hamer testified that when he arrived at the Defendant’s apartment, the 

Defendant and the Defendant’s brother, Michael, were present. Mr. Hamer described the 

children as “rambunctious” and “in and out of the house.” He said the Defendant allowed 

the children to go into the back of the apartment to play video games. Mr. Hamer said that 

he and the Defendant cooked and drank, that the Defendant went back and forth to the

bedroom where the children were, and that it had been a “fun day.” Mr. Hamer said that 

after the children were calmer than they had been, he looked in a bedroom and saw one of 

the children sitting on the Defendant’s lap. Mr. Hamer said adults were “in and out during 

the day.” 

Mr. Hamer testified that the Defendant was in the bedroom with the children “for a 

while.” Mr. Hamer said the children sat on the floor and shared the remote controls for the 

video games and that an unidentified child sat on the Defendant’s lap. Mr. Hamer said that 

the third or fourth time he went to check on the children, he saw a child on the Defendant’s 

lap and the Defendant’s pants “unbuckled, unbuttoned, and unzipped.” Mr. Hamer did not 

recall which child sat on the Defendant’s lap when the Defendant’s pants were unfastened. 

Mr. Hamer said that when he saw this, he “took a second guess at” himself because he had 

been drinking alcohol. Mr. Hamer said that although he had been drinking, he did not think 

he had been “completely drunk.” Mr. Hamer said that he later saw the Defendant stand 

and noticed that the Defendant’s pants were “unbuckled, unzipped, and undone.” Mr. 

Hamer said he could see the Defendant’s boxer shorts but did not see the Defendant’s 

genitals. 

Mr. Hamer testified that R.C.1, R.C.2, and R.C.3 reported the Defendant’s actions 

to their parents and that the parents talked to Mr. Hamer and his wife “almost a week later,”

at which point they “started putting two and two together.” Mr. Hamer said that the adults 

“sat [all the children] down and . . . asked what happened one by one, and all of them had 

similar stories.” Mr. Hamer said that the adults talked to each child individually and that 

the other children were in another room playing video games as the children were 

questioned individually. Mr. Hamer said that after learning of the children’s reports of 

inappropriate touching, he went with Mr. and Ms. Callicutt to the Defendant’s apartment. 

Mr. Hamer said that the Defendant’s brother answered the door and that the Defendant 

would not come to the door. Mr. Hamer said the Defendant was inside the apartment and 

that the Defendant “talked right then and there.” Mr. Hamer said that the Defendant’s 

brother called the police first and that Ms. Callicutt also called the police. Mr. Hamer said 

Mr. and Ms. Callicutt wore their security guard uniforms during the discussion with the 

Defendant. Mr. Hamer did not recall the Defendant’s “getting hit” and said the police 

“took [the Defendant] in.”

Mr. Hamer testified that the Defendant had asked for J.S. to spend the night at the 

Defendant’s apartment but that Mr. Hamer and his wife had refused because J.S. had 
-11-

seizures and was nonverbal at the time. Mr. Hamer said that the Defendant later asked for 

J.H. to spend the night at the Defendant’s apartment but that Mr. Hamer and his wife 

refused.

The Defendant did not offer evidence. The State made the following elections of 

the offenses:

Count 1: Aggravated sexual battery by touching R.C.1’s “behind inside of 

his clothes when [R.C.1] was sitting in the defendant’s lap”

Count 2: Aggravated sexual battery of R.C.2 “with the defendant using his 

hand to touch [R.C.2] on his posterior while [R.C.2] was sitting on the 

defendant’s lap in the defendant’s bedroom”

Count 3: Aggravated sexual battery of J.S. “with the defendant using his 

hand to touch . . . [J.S.]’s body parts, buttocks, under his clothing in the 

defendant’s bedroom”

Count 4: Aggravated sexual battery of K.C. “described as the defendant 

using his hand to touch [K.C.’s] buttocks inside of her pants while she was 

sitting in the defendant’s bedroom

Count 5: No election, attempted aggravated sexual battery of R.C.3

Count 6: Solicitation of a minor for aggravated sexual battery of J.H. 

“described . . . as the defendant requesting [J.H.] to, ‘sit on my d---’ when 

[J.H.] and the defendant were in the defendant’s bedroom”

After receiving the evidence, the jury found the Defendant guilty of one count each 

of aggravated sexual battery of R.C.1, R.C.2, J.S., and K.C. The jury also found the 

Defendant guilty of attempted aggravated sexual battery of R.C.3 and of solicitation of 

aggravated sexual battery of J.H. At a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed an 

effective 110-year sentence. This appeal followed.

The Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions. 

He acknowledges that evidence exists of his guilt but argues that it is insufficient to support 

the convictions because it consists of the uncorroborated testimony of the child victims.

In determining the sufficiency of the evidence, the standard of review is “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 beyond a reasonable doubt.” 
-12-

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979); see State v. Vasques, 221 S.W.3d 514, 521 

(Tenn. 2007). The State is “afforded the strongest legitimate view of the evidence and all 

reasonable inferences” from that evidence. Vasques, 221 S.W.3d at 521. The appellate 

courts do not “reweigh or reevaluate the evidence,” and questions regarding “the credibility 

of witnesses [and] the weight and value to be given the evidence . . . are resolved by the 

trier of fact.” State v. Bland, 958 S.W.2d 651, 659 (Tenn. 1997); see State v. Sheffield, 676 

S.W.2d 542, 547 (Tenn. 1984).

“A crime may be established by direct evidence, circumstantial evidence, or a 

combination of the two.” State v. Hall, 976 S.W.2d 121, 140 (Tenn. 1998); see State v. 

Sutton, 166 S.W.3d 686, 691 (Tenn. 2005). “The standard of review ‘is the same whether 

the conviction is based upon direct or circumstantial evidence.’” State v. Dorantes, 331 

S.W.3d 370, 379 (Tenn. 2011) (quoting State v. Hanson, 279 S.W.3d 265, 275 (Tenn. 

2009)).

“Aggravated sexual battery is unlawful sexual contact with a victim by the 

defendant or the defendant by a victim accompanied by any of the following circumstances:

. . . The victim is less than thirteen (13) years of age.” T.C.A. § 39-13-504(a)(4). “‘Sexual 

contact’ includes the intentional touching of the victim’s, the defendant’s, or any other 

person’s intimate parts, or the intentional touching of the clothing covering the immediate 

area of the victim’s, the defendant’s, or any other person’s intimate parts, if that intentional 

touching can be reasonably construed as being for the purpose of sexual arousal or 

gratification[.]” Id. § 39-13-501(6). “‘Intimate parts’ includes semen, vaginal fluid, the 

primary genital area, groin, inner thigh, buttock or breast of a human being[.]” Id. at (2).

A person commits criminal attempt who, acting with the kind of culpability 

otherwise required for the offense:

. . .

Acts with intent to complete a course of action or cause a result that would 

constitute the offense, under the circumstances surrounding the conduct as 

the person believes them to be, and the conduct constitutes a substantial step 

toward the commission of the offense. 

Id. § 39-12-101(a)(3).

It is an offense for a person eighteen (18) years of age or older, by means of 

oral, written or electronic communication, electronic mail or internet 

services, directly or through another, to intentionally command, request, hire, 

persuade, invite or attempt to induce a person whom the person making the 

solicitation knows, or should know, is less than eighteen (18) years of age, 
-13-

or solicits a law enforcement officer posing as a minor, and whom the person 

making the solicitation reasonably believes to be less than eighteen (18) years 

of age, to engage in conduct that, if completed, would constitute a violation 

by the soliciting adult of one (1) or more of the following offenses:

. . . 

Aggravated sexual battery, pursuant to § 39-13-504[.]

Id. § 30-13-528(a)(4).

We begin by noting that, contrary to the Defendant’s assertion that the testimony of 

a child victim is insufficient, in the absence of corroborating evidence, to support a 

conviction, the testimony of a victim may provide sufficient evidence, standing alone, to 

support a conviction. See, e.g., State v. Bonds, 502 S.W.3d 118, 146 (Tenn. Crim. App. 

2016); State v. Nance, 393 S.W.3d 212, 230-31 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012). In any event, 

the Defendant’s argument is factually flawed. As we will discuss, the victims corroborated 

one another’s accounts, as some of the victims were eyewitnesses to offenses committed 

against other victims. In addition, Mr. Hamer saw the Defendant’s pants unfastened, as 

testified to by R.C.2.

We note, first, that with respect to all of the victims, the evidence showed that they 

were under age thirteen at the time of the offenses. The victims’ mothers testified about 

their dates of birth, and the children testified to their ages on the date of the offenses or 

their ages at the time of the trial.

The jury found the Defendant guilty in Count 1 of aggravated sexual battery of 

R.C.1. The evidence in the light most favorable to the State shows that R.C.1 testified that 

the Defendant touched his “behind” under his clothes and that the Defendant kissed R.C.1 

on the lips. Ms. Hamer testified that she saw R.C.1 sitting on the Defendant’s lap in the 

bedroom. J.S. testified that he saw the Defendant inappropriately touching R.C.1 on the 

buttocks, which was consistent with J.S.’s statement in the forensic interview that J.S. saw 

the Defendant touch R.C.1’s buttocks when R.C.1 sat on the Defendant’s lap. The evidence 

is sufficient to support this conviction.

In Count 2, the jury found the Defendant guilty of aggravated sexual battery of 

R.C.2, who testified that the Defendant touched his posterior while R.C.2 sat in front of the 

Defendant in a chair. R.C.2 said the Defendant’s pants were unzipped and that the 

Defendant instructed R.C.2 kiss the Defendant using R.C.2’s tongue. Mr. Hamer testified 

that he saw the Defendant’s pants unfastened when a child sat on the Defendant’s lap, 

although Mr. Hamer could not recall which child he saw on the Defendant’s lap. R.C.3 

testified that she saw R.C.2 on the Defendant’s lap. R.C.3 also testified that she was present 
-14-

when the Defendant instructed R.C.2 to kiss the Defendant, that R.C.2 kissed the 

Defendant’s cheek, that the Defendant told R.C.2 to give the Defendant a real kiss, and that 

R.C.2 kissed the Defendant’s mouth. J.S. stated in his forensic interview and in his 

testimony that he saw the Defendant touch R.C.2’s buttocks when R.C.2 sat on the 

Defendant’s lap. R.C.3 testified that she was present when the Defendant told R.C.2 to 

kiss the Defendant, that she saw the Defendant kiss R.C.2 on the mouth, and that she saw 

R.C.2 seated on the Defendant’s lap, although she did not see “anything happen.” R.C.1 

stated in his forensic interview that he saw the Defendant touch R.C.2’s middle parts and 

behind. The evidence is sufficient to support this conviction.

In Count 3, the jury found the Defendant guilty of aggravated sexual battery of J.S., 

who testified that he and the Defendant were alone in the Defendant’s bedroom when the 

Defendant told J.S. to sit on the Defendant’s lap. J.S. said the Defendant touched his 

buttocks inside his clothes, and he circled buttocks on an anatomical diagram to show 

where the Defendant had touched him. In addition to J.S.’s testimony, J.H. testified that 

he saw the Defendant touch J.S.’s buttocks inside J.S.’s clothes. J.H. said he saw the 

Defendant’s thumb sticking out of J.S.’s pants but did not see the rest of the Defendant’s 

hand. R.C.2 stated in his forensic interview that he saw the Defendant touch J.S.’s penis 

and buttocks outside J.S.’s clothes. The evidence is sufficient to support this conviction.

In Count 4, the jury found the Defendant guilty of aggravated sexual battery of K.C. 

Although K.C. did not testify, J.H. testified that he was present when the Defendant told 

J.S. to bring the Defendant a container of baby oil, which the Defendant applied to his 

finger. J.H. said the Defendant told K.C. to sit on the Defendant’s lap but that J.H. told 

K.C. “no.” J.H. said the Defendant “sticked his fingers in [K.C.’s and J.S.’s] butts.” J.H. 

said he saw the Defendant’s thumb sticking out of K.C.’s pants but that the rest of the 

Defendant’s hand was inside K.C.’s pants. J.H.’s statements in his forensic interview 

relative to the Defendant’s touching K.C’s buttocks were consistent with J.H.’s trial 

testimony. R.C.1 stated in his forensic interview that the Defendant touched all of the 

children’s middle parts and behinds, and R.C.1 identified K.C. as having been one of the 

children present. The evidence is sufficient to support this conviction.

In Count 5, the jury found the Defendant guilty of attempted aggravated sexual 

battery of R.C.3, who testified that the Defendant gave her liquor and slid his hand down 

her back trying to touch her buttocks but that she left the room to prevent him from touching 

her buttocks. R.C.3 testified that the Defendant asked all the children to kiss him and told 

the children “not to tell nobody what had happened.” J.S. testified that he saw R.C.3 sit on 

the Defendant’s lap and that the Defendant touched R.C.3 in “the same” areas in which the 

Defendant touched J.S., which he identified as including his buttocks. R.C.2 stated in his 

forensic interview that he saw the Defendant touch R.C.3’s buttocks. The evidence is 

sufficient to support this conviction.
-15-

In Count 6, the jury found the Defendant guilty of solicitation of a person under age 

18 to commit aggravated sexual battery, relative to J.H. In his testimony, J.H. said that 

while they were in the Defendant’s bedroom, the Defendant told him that when J.H. was 

ready, J.H. could “stick . . . [his] penis in [the Defendant’s] butt.” J.H. also said that the 

Defendant forcibly kissed J.H.’s mouth. J.H. also said that the Defendant asked J.H. to “sit 

closer to” the Defendant’s genitalia. J.H. provided a consistent account in his forensic 

interview. The evidence is sufficient to support this conviction.

In consideration of the foregoing and the record as a whole, the judgments of the 

trial court are affirmed.

 _____________________________________

 ROBERT H. MONTGOMERY, JR., JUDGE