HomeMy WebLinkAbout99-0887 criminalCOMMONWEALTH :IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
:CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v. No. 99-0887
Wayne Franklin Rideout,
Defendant CRIMINAL ACTION
OPINION PURSUANT TO Pa. R.A.P. 1925
HOFFER, P.J.
This opinion is written pursuant to §1925. The matter complained of on
appeal states the following:
It was error for the Court to deny the defense motion for a mistrial when
Joyce Van Pelt, a Commonwealth witness, testified that the Defendant had
unlawful sexual relations with other girls besides her daughter who was the
victim in this case.
Before we proceed to the above issue, we will outline the background of this
case. The defendant is Wayne Franklin Rideout, Jr. Defendant was found guilty
after a jury trial on November 8-10, 1999, of four counts of statutory sexual
assault, one count of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, five counts of
aggravated indecent assault, five counts of indecent assault without consent, and
one count of corruption of a minor. The minor in this case is M.A.S., born on
November 22, 1982.
In June of 1998, defendant was the assistant manager at the Kentucky
Fried Chicken in Carlisle. M.A.S., who was fifteen years old at the time, worked
part-time at the same establishment. The mother of M.A.S., Joyce Van Pelt,
became concerned when she read excerpts from the diary of M.A.S. describing a
man she had arranged to meet at the local pool. Mrs. Van Pelt eventually
determined that the man was the defendant, with whom M.A.S. worked, when
she met with M.A.S., the defendant, and the manager of the Kentucky Fried
Chicken. The discovery of the diaries of M.A.S. eventually led to Mrs. Van Pelt's
discovery of the relationship between the defendant and M.A.S., which ultimately
led to defendant's prosecution and conviction.
Defendant claims that it was error for the court to deny a mistrial when
Mrs. Van Pelt, a witness for the prosecution, read a statement from the child's
diary before the jury. The following exchange occurred during the
Commonwealth's redirect examination of the witness:
Mr. Keating (the prosecutor): I am asking you to look at
Commonwealth Exhibit Number 3 for a moment. The first entry, is that dated
August 11, 19987
A: No.
Mr. Andrews (for the defendant): I think you have got different
exhibits, Mr. Keating.
Mr. Keating: I'm sorry, excuse me. Commonwealth Exhibit Number
1, specifically August 11, 1998, I want you to go to five lines down. What does
that say?
A: Where it says Frank says it is all my fault?
Q: Yes.
2
A: Frank says it's all my fault, but I didn't do anything. I didn't even
go into any detail in here about me and him. I found out I'm not the only minor
he's done this to.
The defendant then objected to the last portion of the testimony and
moved for a mistrial at a sidebar, which this court denied. This court offered to
give a curative instruction which defense counsel declined on the basis that the
instruction would call further attention to the statement.
This court denied the motion for a mistrial in consideration of the precept
that although evidence of a defendant's involvement in prior criminal activity is
inadmissible, not every reference to prior criminal activity requires a mistrial. See
Commonwealth v. Miller, 333 Pa. Super. 58, 61,481 A.2d 1221, 1222 (1984).
Under the appropriate circumstances, a cautionary instruction is sufficient to
dispel any taint arising from the irrelevant inadmissible evidence. Id. This court
offered a curative instruction in response to the defendant's motion, which the
defense refused. Additionally, the nature of the reference and whether the
remark was intentionally elicited by the Commonwealth are considerations
relevant to the determination of whether a mistrial is required. See
Commonwealth v. Richardson, 496 Pa. 521, 526-27, 437 A.2d 1162, 1165
(1981). This court found that the prosecutor for the Commonwealth, who stated
that the witness read past where he had intended her to read, did not
intentionally elicit the testimony. It is for the above reasons that this court denied
the defendant's motion for a mistrial.
3