Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Putman

Court of Appeal of Iowa

July 10, 2013

STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
RICKY LEE PUTMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Fayette County, John J. Bauercamper, Judge.

A defendant appeals his judgment and sentence for first-degree sexual abuse, contending (1) there is insufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict, (2) the district court abused its discretion in making certain evidentiary rulings.

Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Stephan J. Japuntich, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Sheryl A. Soich, Assistant Attorney General, W. Wayne Saur, County Attorney, and Denise Timmins, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.

Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Mullins, JJ.

VAITHESWARAN, P.J.

Ricky Putman appeals his judgment and sentence for first-degree sexual abuse. He contends (1) the record contains insufficient evidence to support the jury's finding of guilt, (2) the district court abused its discretion in admitting evidence of child pornography found in his home, and (3) the district court abused its discretion in excluding laboratory reports prepared by the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation.

I. Sufficiency of the Evidence

The jury was instructed that the State would have to prove the following elements of first-degree sexual abuse:

1. On or about May 23, 2010, the defendant, Ricky Lee Putman, performed a sex act with [the child].
2. The defendant did so while [the child] was under the age of 14 years.
3. During the commission of sexual abuse, the defendant caused [the child] a serious injury.

See also Iowa Code §§ 709.1, .2 (2009).

Putman argues there is "no direct evidence inculpating" him in the matter. While he is correct that DNA evidence did not tie him to the crime, the record contains substantial circumstantial evidence to support the jury's finding of guilt. See State v. Bass, 349 N.W.2d 498, 500 (Iowa 1984) (setting forth the standard of review); State v. Hamilton, 309 N.W.2d 471, 479 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.