Opinion ID: 2345444
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Detective Hall's Testimony

Text: During the penalty phase of Johnson's trial, the State presented evidence of the underlying facts supporting Johnson's Rape in the Fourth Degree conviction. To do so, the State called Q.T.  the victim  and Detective Hall of the Wilmington Police Department. Q.T. testified that she knew Johnson from the neighborhood. On December 19, 2002, Q.T. was seven or eight months pregnant, and saw Johnson driving on the street. When she got into his car, Johnson locked the car door and would not let her out. Q.T. testified that Johnson drove off and eventually parked the car behind a building in Wilmington, where he put the car in park and he started like reaching over trying to kiss on me and I was pushing him off ... like pushing him back, like go ahead, like move back, and he proceeded on doing it and he reached over and he got on top of me and held me down with my arms like this (indicating). On re-direct, Q.T. continued that, [Johnson] got on top of me, he put his stuff in me, should I say, and he continued to penetrate without me  when I told him to stop. Detective Hall, who was the chief investigating officer for the Rape in the Fourth Degree conviction, took the stand immediately following Q.T. Detective Hall testified to Q.T.'s account of the rape at the time: She reported that she was in the area of, I believe, 300 block of North Harrison Street, not too far from where she lives and the defendant pulled up, parked, and the two began talking, at which time she was invited inside the car, and they continued to talk about a recent incident that happened not too far from where she lived. Shortly thereafter that, after a few moments, she stated that the defendant locked the doors in the vehicle and drove off. She explained that several times she told him to stop, he refused, and ultimately they made their way to the 1300 block of Stockton, which is across Washington Street from the Wilmington Hospital, it's a small alley-type of a street, and once there, she stated that he forced himself upon her by attempting to kiss her and she again told him numerous times to stop, she just wants to go home, and he then began rubbing her vagina area and ultimately overpowered her and pulled her pants down. Once that happened, he inserted his penis into her vagina and had vaginal sex with her. After the act was over, she stated that he then drove her back to the area where she lived and he let her out of the car. Johnson contends that the Superior Court erred by not, sua sponte, prohibiting Detective Hall from testifying to Q.T.'s account of that crime. Johnson concedes that he made no objection to the now-challenged testimony. Therefore, Johnson has waived the claim on appeal, unless the error was plain. [81] Not only did Johnson's counsel fail to object to the hearsay testimony given by Detective Hall, but also defense counsel attempted to use Q.T.'s hearsay statements to his advantage in cross-examination. Counsel for Johnson brought out what, in his view, were inconsistencies in Q.T.'s testimony thereby soliciting additional hearsay by Detective Hall. The Florida Supreme Court addressed a similar issue in Bowles v. State , holding that [d]uring [capital] penalty proceedings, it is appropriate to introduce details of a prior violent felony conviction in the form of hearsay testimony so long as the defendant has a fair opportunity to rebut. [82] In Johnson's case, the victim testified, was cross-examined, and then re-cross-examined by Johnson's counsel. In addition, Johnson used Detective Hall's hearsay statements from Q.T. to challenge her credibility. Nevertheless, Johnson argues that because he has a constitutional right to have the statutory aggravator proven beyond a reasonable doubt, based on evidence admissible under the same evidentiary standards applicable in the guilt phase, and given the fundamental importance of Detective Hall's hearsay testimony to bolster the force element of the State's section 4209(3)(1)(i) proof, the error is plain. Assuming, arguendo, that an error occurred, we have concluded it was harmless. The record reflects that Johnson's Rape in the Fourth Degree conviction, a prior violent or forcible felony, was proven beyond a reasonable doubt through Q.T.'s own testimony, her medical records, Johnson's plea paperwork and the certified copy of conviction, which were all properly entered into evidence. Moreover, Q.T. was present and cross-examined by Johnson. Accordingly, we hold that Johnson has failed to established plain error.