State v. Eric Mensah

Summary

The Rhode Island Supreme Court affirmed Eric Mensah’s convictions for two counts of first-degree child molestation sexual assault and two counts of second-degree child molestation sexual assault. The court held that Mensah’s challenge to the admission of evidence concerning an uncharged incident was waived because he did not make timely and appropriate objections during trial. The court also addressed his challenges to the denial of his motion for a new trial based on the sufficiency and weight of the evidence.

Holdings

1. An objection to a motion in limine, without a timely and specific objection when the evidence is introduced at trial, does not preserve an evidentiary challenge for appeal. Mensah's Rule 404(b) argument was therefore waived.
2. The evidence was sufficient to support the first-degree child molestation sexual assault conviction because Emma's testimony that Mensah caused anal pain and moved his body up and down constituted evidence from which a reasonable factfinder could infer anal penetration.
3. The trial justice properly denied Mensah's motion for a new trial based on the weight of the evidence because, after independently reviewing the evidence and credibility issues, she determined that reasonable minds could differ from her reservations about the verdict.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Mensah preserved for appellate review his challenge to the admission of evidence concerning the July 2015 incident under Rhode Island Rule of Evidence 404(b) by objecting to the State's motion in limine but not making a timely objection during trial.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the first-degree child molestation sexual assault conviction based on alleged anal penetration.
3. Whether the trial justice properly denied Mensah's motion for a new trial on weight-of-the-evidence grounds after independently reviewing the evidence and determining that reasonable minds could differ.

Disposition

affirmed