Summary
The Rhode Island Supreme Court reviewed Troy Footman’s convictions for sex trafficking of a minor, pandering or permitting prostitution, and driving with a suspended license. The court vacated the two sex-trafficking convictions because the statute then in effect failed to charge a criminal offense, while affirming the remaining convictions. The court also rejected or deemed waived Footman’s claims concerning the bill of particulars, double jeopardy, and denial of a mistrial.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial justice abused her discretion by denying the defendant's motion for an amended bill of particulars.
- Whether the defendant's convictions for sex trafficking of a minor and pandering or permitting prostitution violated the Double Jeopardy Clauses of the United States and Rhode Island Constitutions.
- Whether the defendant waived his double-jeopardy claim by failing to raise it before trial.
- Whether the trial justice abused her discretion by denying the defendant's motion for a mistrial after a witness referred to the defendant's prior incarceration and discussion of human trafficking.
Holdings
- The convictions on counts one and two were vacated because § 11-67-6 failed to charge a criminal offense.
- The trial justice did not abuse her discretion in denying the defendant's motion for an amended bill of particulars.
- The double-jeopardy challenge was moot as to the vacated sex-trafficking convictions and was also waived because the defendant did not raise it by pretrial motion.
- The trial justice did not abuse her discretion in denying the motion for a mistrial because the witness's brief reference to incarceration did not require a mistrial and any potential prejudice was cured by the cautionary instruction.
Key quotations
“Although § 11-67-6 contained a definitional section, a section describing various types of conduct, and a penalty section, there was no declaration that the conduct set forth in the statute was a felony crime.” (764)
“This response, coupled with the abundant pretrial discovery, including several witness statements detailing defendant’s conduct from May 9, 2013, to July 30, 2013, more than satisfied the notice requirement.” (765)
“We are satisfied that this cautionary instruction was more than sufficient to cure any potential prejudice in these circumstances.” (769)
Factual background
The defendant housed and financially supported a fourteen-year-old runaway, obtained false identification documents for her, brought her to an exotic dancing club, and arranged for her to perform sex acts for compensation. He collected the money she earned from dancing and sexual encounters and posted sexually suggestive advertisements for her online. Police discovered the victim's age during an undercover investigation, leading to the defendant's arrest and prosecution.
Procedural history
Footman was charged by criminal information in Providence County Superior Court, tried before a jury, and convicted on all five counts. The trial justice denied his motion for a new trial and imposed sentence. On appeal, Footman challenged the denial of an amended bill of particulars, asserted double-jeopardy violations, and challenged the denial of a mistrial motion.
Remand instructions
The record was returned to the Superior Court. The judgment of conviction was vacated as to counts one and two and affirmed in all other respects.