Opinion ID: 4556289
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Green’s Trial

Text: Green’s trial, which was held in June 2015, lasted five days. The State called eight witnesses: Sarah, her sister and mother, three police officers, the SANE nurse, and the forensic DNA analyst. The testimony of these witnesses produced the version of events described in the Factual Background above. After the prosecution rested, Green moved for a judgment of acquittal on Counts 5 and 6 (two of the six Kent Acres Allegations) and Counts 11 through 14 (all of the Prior Stevens Street Allegations). Because the State had not presented any evidence to support those counts, it did not oppose—and the court granted—Green’s motion. 9 The defense called one witness—Green himself. Green’s testimony was remarkably brief; his direct examination, much of which was devoted to questions about Green’s background and places of residence, takes up only seven transcript pages. The State’s cross-examination was less than half the length of defense counsel’s direct, and there was no redirect examination. When asked to respond to the Kent Acres Allegations, Green responded curtly: “I deny the allegations . . . [b]ecause I would never do something like that to her or to anyone.”16 In like manner, when asked about the Thames Street Allegations, Green answered: “It’s totally fabricated . . . [b]ecause I would never do something like that to [Sarah].”17 Green also denied the May 28, 2014 Allegations, saying that he had “never done anything to [Sarah] like that, never.”18 He explained that he had driven Tracy to the bowling alley that night and, after dropping her off, waited with a friend, Wallace Skinner, “until she [Tracy] was done [bowling.]”19 Implicit in this testimony is the notion that Green was never alone during the time between his dropping off Tracy at the bowling alley and his return later that night to pick her up—that is, when Sarah said that Green had raped her. But notably, Wallace Skinner did not testify so Green’s alibi was not corroborated. 16 App. to Opening Br. at A559–60. 17 Id. at 561. 18 Id. at 562. 19 Id. at 563. 10 Green also attempted to explain away the DNA evidence by claiming—in direct contradiction to the testimony of Sarah and the officer who collected the stained skort20—that “[t]he clothes came from the laundry room.”21 Green did not explain the significance of the clothes being in the laundry room. For instance, he does not say that his semen-stained clothing was also in the laundry room. But we understand that that was the inference his testimony was intended to support as, in her closing argument, Green’s counsel noted the possibility Green’s DNA was transferred from his clothing to Sarah’s while in the laundry room.