Court Opinion

ID: 9720700
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 08:39:40.812804+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:24:20.720496
License: Public Domain

GARRARD, Judge,
dissenting.
While I agree that the court properly imposed consecutive sentences, I dissent to reversal of the convictions for neglect.
There was ample evidence that the children were malnourished. For example, after observing their gains in height and weight after a short period of foster care Dr. McCann testified that it was his opinion both suffered from malnutrition. The totality of the circumstances, including the children's appearance, their complaints about food and their descriptions of how they were cared for, sustain the reasonable inference that Ricketts was aware of a high probability that the children were not being properly fed and were malnourished.
As for the statutory element of harm, it seems to me that the term "malnutrition" clearly denotes a lack of necessary or proper food substances in the body (or the inability of the body to properly absorb the same, an alternative negated by the gains each child made when placed in foster care). It would then seem to follow that children suffering from malnutrition a for-tiori have had their health endangered. And that is true whether the malnutrition is the result of the culpable act of some particular person, or the consequence of famine or some other cause.
By knowingly failing to provide the children with necessary food so as to endanger their health, Ricketts committed the charged offenses.
I would affirm the judgment in all respects.