Hackett v. State

869 So. 2d 672 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004) · District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District · April 2, 2004

Summary

The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed David Hackett’s convictions for two counts of sexual battery and two counts of lewd or lascivious molestation. The court held that collateral-crime evidence concerning the defendant’s similar sexual abuse of his daughter was sufficiently similar and, in any event, any error in admitting it was harmless in light of the defendant’s confession.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Writing for the Court
Thompson, J.; Palmer, J.; Monaco, J.
Jurisdiction
Florida
Decision date
April 2, 2004
Procedural posture
Hackett appealed his convictions for two counts of sexual battery and two counts of lewd or lascivious molestation, challenging the admission of collateral-crime evidence concerning alleged sexual abuse of his daughter.
Standard of review
Abuse of discretion
Precedential value
precedential
Parties
David Hackett v. State of Florida
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

evidencecharacter evidencecriminal procedure

Practice areas

criminal lawevidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether testimony concerning Hackett's prior sexual abuse of his daughter was admissible as collateral-crime or similar-fact evidence in the prosecution for sexual battery and lewd or lascivious molestation of his son.
  2. Whether any error in admitting the collateral-crime evidence was harmless because the evidence did not become a feature of the trial and Hackett confessed.

Holdings

  1. Collateral-crime evidence is admissible when both the charged offense and the collateral offense occur within a family setting and there is some additional showing of similarity beyond the family relationship. The evidence concerning Hackett's abuse of his daughter satisfied that standard because the victims were his biological children, were abused at the same age, suffered the same types of abuse, and were abused in similar settings.
  2. Even if the trial court abused its discretion in admitting the collateral-crime evidence, any error was harmless because the evidence did not become a feature of the trial and Hackett's confession independently supported the convictions.

Key quotations

Finally, we conclude that the collateral crime evidence did not become a feature of the trial and that any abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court in admitting the evidence was harmless in light of Hackett’s confession. (869 So. 2d at 674)

Factual background

Hackett was convicted of sexually abusing his eleven-year-old son, who testified that Hackett committed oral and anal sexual acts against him during a visitation. Hackett's adult daughter testified that, when she was eleven and lived with Hackett, he regularly engaged in oral, anal, and vaginal sex with her. During a recorded police interview, Hackett admitted abusing his daughter and ultimately admitted abusing his son; his description of an act involving his son matched details provided by the son.

Procedural history

The trial court admitted testimony from Hackett's adult daughter that Hackett had sexually abused her when she was eleven. Hackett was convicted of the charged offenses and appealed, arguing that the collateral-crime evidence lacked sufficient similarity and was improperly admitted. The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Florida District Court Of Appeal Of Florida Fifth District