Summary
The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed Jonathan Thacker’s convictions for residential burglary and rape. The court held that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion under Arkansas’s rape-shield statute by excluding DNA evidence from semen found on the victim’s bedsheet and pillowcase that did not match Thacker’s DNA.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the circuit court erred under Arkansas's rape-shield statute by excluding DNA evidence from semen samples found on the victim's bedsheet and pillowcase that did not match Thacker's DNA.
- Whether the semen evidence was sufficiently linked to the charged rape to be relevant and whether its probative value outweighed its inflammatory or prejudicial effect.
Holdings
- The circuit court did not commit clear error or a manifest abuse of discretion by excluding evidence that semen found on the victim's bedsheet and pillowcase did not match Thacker's DNA.
Key quotations
“Therefore, giving due deference to the circuit court, we hold that the court did not commit a manifest abuse of discretion in denying Thacker’s motions to admit such evidence pursuant to our rape-shield statute.” (2015 Ark. 406, at 5-6)
Factual background
The victim was attacked in her home, where the assailant attempted vaginal intercourse and forced anal intercourse before she escaped through a bathroom window. Police found Thacker's wallet containing identifying cards in the victim's bedroom, and the victim and a neighbor identified Thacker, although both had initially provided descriptions or identifications that differed from Thacker's appearance. Thacker presented an alibi and sought to introduce evidence that semen samples from the victim's bedsheet and pillowcase did not contain his DNA, arguing that the evidence supported a misidentification defense.
Procedural history
A Faulkner County jury convicted Thacker of residential burglary and rape and imposed concurrent sentences of eighteen years for rape and five years for residential burglary. Before trial, Thacker moved to admit DNA evidence concerning semen samples, and the State moved to exclude the evidence concerning an additional pillowcase sample. The circuit court excluded the evidence, permitted Thacker to refer to the fact that his DNA was not found on items submitted for testing, and the Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed.