Hence this court affirmed defendant's conviction for sexual child abuse.
1) Did the Trial Court err in determining that there was sufficient evidence to support a finding of sexual exploitation of the child?
Defendant, Robert Paul Brackins is married to the mother of the then twelve-year-old victim. On the date of the alleged offense, Brackins was at home with the child. The mother was at work. Mrs. Brackins testified that Mr. Brackins lived at the same residence as the victim, and that Mr. Brackins was responsible for the care of the victim while she worked.
The Court states that the Polaroid snapshot was not a necessary element of the exploitation although it was damning evidence of the act of exploitation. To be convicted of exploitation and, therefore, child abuse, threats, coercion, or subsequent use of the fruits of the acts are not necessary. The State need only prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the parent or person having temporary or permanent custody of a child took advantage of or unjustly or improperly used the child for his or her own benefit. That is what the State proved in the instant case. Hence, the evidence was sufficient to sustain the charge.
Did the Trial Court err in determining that there was sufficient evidence to support a finding of sexual exploitation of the child?Did the Trial Court err in not rendering a verdict upon the facts and the law as required by Rule 4-328?Did the Trial Court err in determining that there was sufficient evidence to find that the Defendant was a person who had permanent or temporary care or custody or responsibility for supervision of the child?
3) Did the Trial Court err in determining that there was sufficient evidence to find that the Defendant was a person who had permanent or temporary care or custody or responsibility for supervision of the child?The Court finds that the mother of the victim was married to Brackins and that she, he, and the victim all lived in the same residence. She related to the court that Brackins was responsible for the care of the children, including the victim, while she was working. That evidence was sufficient to satisfy the care, custody and responsibility elements of the offense. The test we apply in reviewing sufficiency of the evidence is whether, after viewing it in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
2) Did the Trial Court err in not rendering a verdict upon the facts and the law as required by Rule 4-328?
Brackins was the only male present in the household or, for that matter, the only other person present when the abuse occurred. Brackins requested the victim, a twelve-year-old female, to unbutton her blouse and expose her breasts to him in order for him to take a semi-nude Polaroid snapshot of her. When she refused to do so, Brackins "did it for her." After taking the photograph, Brackins, by his own admission, discarded it approximately 30 seconds later. The Circuit Court for Harford County convicted Brackins of child abuse. He was sentenced to three years imprisonment. That sentence was suspended, and he was placed on five years supervised probation. Brackins challenged an order of a trial court (Maryland), which convicted him of sexual child abuse under Md. Ann. Code art. 27, § 35A(a)(4)(i).
The court pronounced its verdict of guilty with regard to child abuse. That verdict, as we have previously stated, was based upon evidence establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.Although it might have been more artfully expressed, Judge Carr nevertheless was endeavoring to say that he was reserving ruling on the battery count of the indictment and the imposition of sentence on the child abuse count. As it developed, there was no verdict ever entered on the battery. The sentence, however, was properly imposed on the child abuse conviction.
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm's unofficial views of the Justices' opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content
Robert Paul BRACKINS v. STATE of MarylandCourt of Special Appeals of MarylandAugust 31, 1990 August 31, 1990, Filed
California woman to serve 12-year sentence for rape of Bel Air boy, 13 - Baltimore Sun
California woman to serve 12-year sentence for rape of Bel Air boy, 13Baltimore SunAs conditions of her probation, she is ordered to have no contact with the boy or his family and to have no unsupervised contact with anyone younger than 18, according to a release from the Harford County State's Attorney's Office. .Woman Sentenced for Raping Bel Air BoyPatch.comall 4 news articles »
Teen Suspect in Blind Man&aposs Homicide Appears In Court - WBAL Baltimore
Teen Suspect in Blind Man's Homicide Appears In CourtWBAL BaltimoreThe Harford County state's attorney said Graham admitted to the crime and that Graham lived right behind Ward on Fairwood Drive in Bel Air. Court records also stated that detectives found bloody pants and a knife outside of Graham's apartment. .and more »
On the move – 8/12/11: Kornblatt named firm&aposs chairman - Daily Record (subscription)
On the move – 8/12/11: Kornblatt named firm's chairmanDaily Record (subscription)Howe has been national director of foster care for KidsPeace National Centers, and Maryland director of The Pressley Ridge Schools. He has a master's degree from the University of Maryland. The Harford County Chamber of Commerce has elected the .
Divorce Attorneys - Lawyers - Harford County, Maryland - Attorney Directory - Maryland Lawyer Directory
