SECOND DI VI SI ON M I LLER, P. J. , M ERCI ER and C OOM ER, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d. P le a s e r e fe r to the S upr e m e C our t of G e or gia Judic ia l E m e r ge nc y Or de r o f M a r c h 1 4 , 2 0 2 0 for fur the r infor m a tion a t (https ://w w w

. ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s ).

A pr i l 17, 2020



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A2 0 A0 61 5 . STURGIS v . THE STATE.

M E R C I E R , J u dg e.

A ju ry fo u n d Dav i d St u rg i s g u i l t y o f c h il d m o l es tat i o n an d ag grav at ed ch i ld

m o les t at i o n

. Fo ll owi n g th e d en i al o f h i s m ot i on fo r n ew t ri al
, St urg i s ap p eal s ,

a s s ert i ng as erro r t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s ad m i s s i o n o f ev id en ce o f p ri o r act s of a l l e g e d

m o les t at i o n . W e d i s cern n o erro r an d affi rm

.
Co n st ru ed i n t h e l i g h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e ju ry ’ s v erd ict
, t he ev id en ce s h o wed

t h at St u rg i s o ft en re s i d e d w i t h t h e v i ct i m A. O. an d h er m o t h er an d t wo s i s t ers

.
So m et im e b et ween 2 0 1 1 an d 2 0 1 3 , w h en A. O. was aro un d 14 o r 15 y ears o l d,

St u rg i s , wh o m A. O. k new as “ Fat Dad d y ,” l i ft ed h er s h i rt an d p u t h i s m ou t h o n h er

b reas t s

. On an o t her o ccas i o n , St u rg i s p u l led o u t h i s p en i s an d t o ld A. O. to p erfo rm

o ral s ex o n h i m

. W h en A. O. refu s ed
, St u rg i s us ed h i s h an d t o fo rce h er h ead d o wn ,p u t h i s p en i s i n h er m o ut h
, an d ejacu l at ed

. A. O. ev en t u al l y t o l d h er o l d er s i s t er, wh o

t h en t o l d t h ei r m o t h er ab o u t St u rg i s ’ act s

.
Th e t ri al co urt al s o al l o wed ev id en ce o f t wo p ri o r act s un d er bo t h OCGA § 2 4

-

4 -4 0 4 (b ) an d OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 1 4

. Fo r t h e fi rs t p ri o r act , t h e St at e p res en t ed t h e

t es t i m o ny o f A. W ., wh o was 3 1 y ears o ld at t h e t i m e o f t ri al

. Sh e tes t ifi ed t h at wh en

s h e was ei g h t o r ni ne y ears o l d
, s h e at ten d ed a s u m m er cam p wh ere St u rg i s was a

cam p co u n s el o r o r v o l un t eer an d A. W .’ s m o t h er was th e cam p d irect o r. A. W

. al s o

k n e w S t u r g i s b y t he n i ck n am e “ Fat Dad d y .” A. W

. ex p l ai n ed t hat wh il e i n t h e

s wi m m i n g p o o l du ri n g a cam

p fi el d t ri p, St u rg i s p u l l ed her b at h in g s u i t as id e an d p ut

h i s fi n g e r i n s i d e h er vag i n a s ev eral t im es

. An d
, wh i l e ri d i ng i n a v an b ack t o cam p

wi t h St u rg i s aft er s wi m

m i n g, St u rg i s p u t h i s h an d u n der A. W .’ s t o wel an d fo n d l ed

h er b reas t area. St u rg i s to ld h er n o t t o tel l h er m ot h er. Bu t as s o o n a s t h e y ret u rn ed

t o th e cam

p , A

. W

. to l d h er m o t h er, wh o “ s t art ed fi g h t i n g ” St urg i s

. A p ol i ce o ffi cer

b ro k e u p t h e fi g ht

. Years l at er, i n t h e fal l o f 2 0 1 3 , a ch il d h o od fri en d t o l d A.W

. t h at

“ Fat Dad d y

g o t l o ck ed u p fo r m o l es t i n g h is g i rl fri en d ’ s d au g h t er.” A. W . as k ed h er

m o th er i f s h e recal l ed wh et h er s h e h ad rep o rt ed St u rg i s t o t h e p o l i ce aft er h e m o l es t ed

A. W

. at s u m

m er cam p

. W h en A. W .’ s m o t h er res p o n d ed t h at “ s h e d i d n ’ t t h i n k s h e

2d i d
, s h e d i dn ’ t k n ow if th ey h ad t ak en i t i n w ri t i n g ,” A. W

. co n t act ed t h e p o l i ce an d

rep o rt ed t h e i n ci d en t

.
Th e St at e al s o p res en t ed t h e t es t i m o n y o f A. O.’ s s i st er B. S., wh o was 2 3 y ears

o l d at t he t i m e o f tri al

. 1 B. S. t es t i fi ed t h at wh en s h e was 1 2 o r 1 3 y ears o l d , St u rg i s

fo l l o w ed h er an d t o u c h ed h er b u t t o ck s ov er her cl o t h es wh i le t h ey were i n s i d e a

co n ven i en ce s t o re. B. S. t es t ifi ed fu rt h er t h at o n an o t h er o ccas i on , St urg i s cl i m b ed

i n t o h er m o t h er’ s b ed wh ere B. S. was s l eep i n g, t o u ch e d h e r b u t t o ck s, pl aced h i s

t o n g u e i n s i d e h er m o u t h , an d p u l l ed h er o n t o p o f h i m

.
A ju ry fo u n d St u rg i s gu i l t y o f ch i l d m o l es t at i on fo r “ s u ck i n g o n” A. O.’ s

b reas t s , an d g u i l t y o f ag g rav at ed ch i l d m o l es t at i o n fo r fo rci n g h er t o p l ace h er m o u th

o n h i s p en i s

. Fo l l owi n g t h e d e n i a l o f St u rg i s ’ m o t i on fo r n ew t ri al
, t h i s ap p eal

fo l l o w ed

.
St u rg i s arg u es th at t h e tri al co u rt erred i n ad m i tt i n g t he t es t i m o ny o f A. W

. an d

B. S. Al t h o u g h h e as sert s t h at t h i s ev i d en ce was i nad m i s s i bl e u n d er OCGA § 2 4 -4

-

4 0 4 (b ) (ch aract er ev i den ce), t h e p ro v is io n s o f OCGA § § 2 4 -4 -4 1 3 (ev i d en ce o f

s i m i l ar t ran s act io n cri m es i n s ex u al as s au l t cas es ) an d 2 4 -4 -4 1 4 (ev i den ce o f s i m i l ar

t ran s act io n cri m es i n ch il d m o l es t at i o n cas es ), wh ere ap p l icab l e, su p e r c e d e t h e

1 Th e t ri al o ccu rred i n 2 01 4

. 3p ro v is i o n s o f OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 0 4 (b ). McAl l i s t er v. S t at e , 3 5 1 Ga. Ap p

. 7 6 , 8 0 (1 ) (8 3 0

SE2 d 44 3 ) (2 0 1 9 ). Rel ev an t h ere, OCG A § 2 4 -4 -4 1 4 (a) p ro v i des : “ In a cri m i n al

p ro ceed in g i n wh i ch t h e accu s ed i s accu s ed o f an o ff en s e o f ch i l d m o l es t at i o n,

ev i d en ce o f t h e accu s ed ’ s co m m i s s i o n o f an o t h er o ffen s e o f ch i l d m ol es t at i o n s h al l

b e ad m i s s i b l e an d m ay b e co n s i d ered fo r i t s beari n g on an y m at t er t o wh i ch i t i s

rel ev an t

. ”

OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 1 4 creat es “ a ‘ ru l e o f in cl u s i o n ,’ t h u s p ro v id in g a s t ro n g

p res u m p t i o n i n fav o r o f ad m i s s i b i l it y b y ex p l ai n i n g th at s u ch ev i d en ce ‘ s h a l l b e

ad m i s s i b l e.’ ” McAl l i s t er , s u p ra (ci t at i on s o m i t t ed ; em p h as i s i n o ri g i n al ). “ [A] n d t h e

St at e can s eek t o ad m i t ev i den ce u n d er th i s p ro v i s i o n fo r an y rel ev an t p u rp o s e,

i n cl u d i n g p r o p en s i t y .” Di xo n v. S t a t e , 3 5 0 Ga. Ap p

. 2 1 1 , 2 1 3 (1 ) (8 2 8 SE2 d 4 2 7 )
(2 0 1 9) (ci t at i o n s an d p un ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ). H o wev er, ev i d en ce t h at i s ad m i s s i b l e

u n d er t h i s ru l e m ay st i l l b e ex cl u d ed u n d er OCGA § 24 -4 -4 03 , “ i f i ts p ro b at iv e v al u e

i s s u b s t an t i al ly o u t wei gh ed b y t h e d an g er of u n fai r p reju d i ce, co n fu si o n o f t h e i s s u es ,

o r m i s l ead i n g t h e ju ry o r b y co n s i d erat io n s o f un d u e d el ay , was t e of t i m e, o r n eed l es s

p res en t at i o n o f cu m

ul at i v e ev i d en ce.” See Di xo n , s u p ra (ci t at i o ns an d pu n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed ). W e wi ll o n ly o v ert u rn a t ri al co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n t o ad m i t o t h er act s ev i d en ce

4wh ere t h ere is a cl ear ab u s e of d i s cret i o n

. Ho lz h eu s er v. S ta t e , 3 5 1 Ga. Ap p

. 2 8 6 , 2 9 6

(2 ) (8 28 SE2 d 6 64 ) (2 0 1 9 ).

St u rg i s arg u es t h at th e p ri o r act ev i d en ce was “ v ery rem ot e [i n t i m e] fro m t h e

ch arg ed o ffen s es ” an d t he “ act s were d is s i m i l ar, wi t h n o s i g nat u re m o d e o r s t y l e o f

co m m i s s io n , m

u ch les s s p eci fi c p o i n ts o f co m m o nal i t y .” Ho wev er, St u rg i s ’ act s o f

i n ap p ro p ri at e s ex u al co n t act w i t h m in o r g irl s h e k n ew an d h ad s p en t t i m e wi t h
, o n e

o f wh o m was A

. O.’ s s i s t er, were s i m i l ar en o u g h t o t h e in ci d en t s i nv o l v i n g A. O. to

“ ai d [ ] t he ju ry i n d et erm i n i n g wh et h er [Sturg i s ] co m m i t t ed ” t h e ch arg ed cri m es

. Bo yd

v. S t a t e , 3 5 1 Ga. Ap p. 4 6 9 , 4 7 3 (3 ) (8 2 9 SE2 d 1 6 3) (2 0 19 ) (ci t at i o n s an d pu n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed ). Al t h ou g h t h e act s ag ai n s t A. O. were n o t co m p l et el y i d en t i cal t o t h e p ri o r

act s ,

t h i s Co u rt p rev i ou s ly reco g n i zed i n a cas e i n vo l v i ng th e ap p l icat i o n o f

o u r fo rm er Ev i d en ce Co d e t h at t h e s e x u al ab us e of y o un g ch i ld ren , reg ard l es s o f

. . . th e n o m en cl at u re o r t y pe o f act s o r o t h er co n d uct
p erp et rat ed u p o n t h em , i s o f s u ffi ci en t s i m i l ari t y t o m ak e t h e ev i d en ce ad m i s s i b l e. Th is i s b ecau s e s ex cri m es ag ai n s t ch il d ren req ui re a u n i q ue b en t o f m i n d.

Di xo n v. S t a t e , 3 4 1 Ga. Ap p

. 2 5 5 , 2 6 2 (1 ) (b ) (8 0 0 SE2 d 1 1 ) (2 0 1 7 ) (ci t at i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed ).

5Fu rt her, t h e rem ot en es s o f t h e p ri o r act s d o es n ot req u i re t h at t h e ev id en ce b e

ex cl u d ed

.

Ex cl u s i o n of p r o o f o f o t h er act s t h at are t o o rem ot e in t im e cat ers
p ri n ci p al l y to t he d u al c o n cern s fo r rel ev an ce an d rel i ab i l i t y

. T he

ev al uat io n of t he p ro ffered ev id en ce i n l ig h t o f t hes e co n cern s m u s t be

m ad e o n a cas e-b y -cas e b as i s t o d et erm i n e wh et her t h e s i g n i fi can ce o f

t h e p ri o r act s h as beco m e t o o at t en u at ed a n d w h e t h e r t h e m em o ri es o f

t h e wi t n es s es h as l i k el y b eco m e t o o frai l

. N ei t her Ru l e 4 0 3 no r a n y

an al og o u s Ru l e p ro vi d es an y b ri g ht -l i n e ru l e as t o h o w o l d i s t o o o l d

.

W i l s o n v. S t at e ,

_

_ _ Ga. Ap p

.

_

_ _ , s l i p o p

. at 1 0 -1 1 (1 ) (b ) ( C a s e No

. A 1 9 A2 1 7 4,

d eci d ed M arch 4 , 2 0 2 0) (ci t at i o n an d pu n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed ). Th ere is n o l eg i t i m at e

co n cern h ere wi th rel ev an cy or rel iab i l i t y

. St urg i s ’ p ri o r act s ag ai n st A

. W

. an d B. S.

were rel ev an t a n d p ro b at i v e reg ard i n g h is i n t en t an d p ro p en s i t y t o co m m i t t h e

ch arg ed cri m es ag ai n st A. O. Fu rt h er, t h ere was n o s h o wi n g ei t her o n d i rect o r cro s s

ex am i n at i o n t h at t h e wi t n es s es ’ m em o ri es were at i s s u e. Th u s , t h e fact t h at t h e act s

ag ai n s t A. W

. an d B. S. were co m m i t t ed ab o ut 2 2 y ears an d 1 0 y ears b efo re t h e act s

ag ai n s t A. O

. d i d n o t d em an d a d i fferen t ru l i n g

. See i d

. (p ri o r act s o ccu rred ab o u t 3 0

y ears earl i er); B o

yd
, su p ra, 3 51 Ga. Ap p

. at 4 7 3 ( 3 ) (p ri o r act s o ccu red b et ween 1 6

an d 2 2 y ears earl i er); Ha r r i s v. S t a t e , 3 4 0 Ga. Ap p

. 8 6 5 , 86 8 (1 ) (b ) (7 9 8 SE2 d 4 9 8 )
(2 0 1 7) (p ri o r act s o ccu rred ab o u t 4 4 y ears earl ier).

6Un d er t h e ci rcu m s tan ces p res en t ed h ere, we can n o t s ay th a t t h e t ri al co u rt

ab u sed i t s d i s cret i o n i n ad m i tt i n g t h e t wo p ri o r act s p u rs uan t t o OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 1 4,

“ e s p e c i al l y g i v en t h e s t ro n g pres u m p t i o n i n fav o r o f ad m i s s i b i l i t y [.] ” Bo yd
, s u p ra,

3 5 1 Ga. Ap p . at 4 74 (3 .)

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Mi l l er

, P. J., a n d

Co o mer , J., co n cu r

.

7