Opinion ID: 2570148
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Mark Johnson

Text: Defendant's other half brother Mark Johnson lived in the park until he was eight years old. Like Danny, he left before defendant was born. Having been severely beaten several times by his uncle Jerry Daulton, he lived in constant fear of being brutalized. He did not meet defendant until defendant was 10 or 12 years old. He never saw defendant being abused. Defendant contends the court erroneously sustained an objection to defense counsel's question whether Mark was negatively affected by his experience in the park. Counsel argued that the effect of the park on others was important because these people remained close to defendant, and since the effects of the park affected them, they therefore affected defendant. The trial court properly ruled that no foundation had been laid that Mark was in the park at the same time as defendant, or that he had a relationship with defendant as they were growing up. The court stated it would allow testimony regarding the specifics of how he related with [defendant] over . . . their experiences in the park. Defendant claims this ruling prevented him from demonstrating that the park caused serious problems for his family members. However, that showing was made by the testimony of numerous other witnesses whose experiences were closer to defendant's than Mark's were. Moreover, the jury would reasonably infer that a child who was physically abused and lived in constant fear of being brutalized would have suffered from this experience.