Court Opinion

ID: 9768276
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 05:53:56.730589+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:39.031686
License: Public Domain

WINTERSHEIMER, Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent.
There was no error in admitting into evidence the spontaneous utterances of the two and a half-year-old victim. Preston v. Commonwealth, Ky. 406 S.W.2d 398 (cert.den.) 386 U.S. 920, 87 S.Ct. 886, 17 L.Ed.2d 792 (1967). The time lapse between the crime and the child’s statements to her mother and grandmother did not reduce their value because the child was still under the stress of nervous excitement. The child-victim had no real motive to fabricate and the trustworthiness of her statements fit into the spontaneous exclamation exemption to the hearsay rule. Buckler v. Commonwealth, Ky. 541 S.W.2d 935 (1976).
Considering the seriousness of the child’s injuries, the trial judge was within his sound discretion in denying the motions for directed verdicts of acquittal on the charge of first-degree assault. A jury, relying on the evidence presented, could reasonably have convicted the accused of first-degree assault. A jury, relying on the evidence presented, could reasonably have convicted the accused of first-degree assault. The photographs presented at trial reveal that the victim was bruised and beaten. She had a large contusion on her forehead as well as a bruised and swollen arm. Most noticeable were the severe burns on her lips and mouth. Such injuries were sufficient to satisfy the requirement of serious physical injury contemplated by KRS 508.-010. The inevitable scarring related to serious burns could render the child’s lips disfigured and would qualify as a physical injury which causes serious and prolonged disfigurement under KRS 500.080(15).
My review of the record indicates that the conviction for first degree assault should be affirmed.