Opinion
No. C9-96-2134.
Filed July 22, 1997.
Appeal from the District Court, Hennepin County, File No. 9620978.
Hubert H. Humphrey III, Attorney General, (for respondent)
Michael O. Freeman, Hennepin County Attorney, J. Michael Richardson, Assistant County Attorney, (for respondent)
John M. Stuart, State Public Defender, Marie L. Wolf, Assistant State Public Defender, (for appellant)
Considered and decided by Parker, Presiding Judge, Toussaint, Chief Judge, and Harten, Judge.
This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3 (1996).
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Appellant Nikia Sajid Nicks argues that the evidence at his trial was stipulated facts insufficient to support his convictions for third-degree criminal sexual conduct and attempted theft from a person. Because there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the verdict, we affirm.
DECISION
Where there is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, our review on appeal is limited to a painstaking analysis of the record to determine whether the evidence, when viewed in a light most favorable to the conviction, was sufficient to permit the [finder of fact] to reach the verdict.
State v. Webb , 440 N.W.2d 426, 430 (Minn. 1989). This standard applies to bench trials as well as to those before a jury. State v. Ibarra , 355 N.W.2d 125, 130 (Minn. 1984). Determinations of the credibility and weight to be given to the testimony are for the fact-finder alone. State v. Lodermeier , 539 N.W.2d 396, 397 (Minn. 1995).
Appellant argues that there was insufficient evidence on the issue of identity. The record contains sufficient evidence of appellant's identity as the perpetrator. The victim of the rape, A.S., confidently identified appellant shortly after the rape and gave consistent statements about the assault throughout the investigation. The trial court was well within its discretion in crediting this testimony. A.S. was also very excited and upset about the rape, as noted by both officers and in the sexual assault examination report. Statements made in such an excited emotional state have an indicia of trustworthiness and provide sufficient evidence to support the verdict. State v. Jensen , 322 N.W.2d 219 (Minn. 1982).
A.S.'s friend, Q.R., who was with her when she was first approached by appellant and his accomplices, also identified appellant as the man who had threatened and tried to rob him. Residents in the apartments next to the laundry room where the victim was raped told police that, although they had not realized that help was needed, they did hear screaming and loud noises at the time of the rape. A condom wrapper found in the laundry room corroborated A.S.'s report to police that appellant had used a condom during the rape.
Appellant's accomplices both identified him as having threatened Q.R. and raped A.S. They also corroborated A.S.'s statements regarding appellant's use of a condom. An accomplice's testimony alone is insufficient to support a conviction. State v. Jones , 347 N.W.2d 796, 800 (Minn. 1984). In this case, however, the accomplices' statements were corroborated by the victims' reports. As such, the testimony may be used to support a finding of guilt. Id. (citing State v. Houle , 257 N.W.2d 320, 324 (Minn. 1977)).
Appellant argues vaguely that the show-up identification was overly suggestive, but concedes that the evidence was admissible because there was no indication of a "very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification." See State v. Gutberlet , 346 N.W.2d 639, 642 (Minn. 1984). He also attacks the identifications by his accomplices, but their credibility was plainly an issue for the trial judge. See Lodermeier , 539 N.W.2d at 397 (credibility of witnesses to be determined by finder of fact). Similarly, appellant's attack on the facts as impossible or improbable raises questions within the province of the trial judge.