MOBILE, Alabama — A Chickasaw man’s conviction for sexually abusing a child under 12 has been upheld by the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, closing out the first stage of his effort to overturn a 10-year prison sentence.
Conviction stands after appeal
The 38-year-old defendant was sentenced in late 2013 after being convicted of sexually abusing a child who was 11 years old at the time. He has been serving his sentence at Fountain Correctional Facility in Atmore since his sentencing. At his original sentencing hearing before a Mobile County circuit judge, the man apologized to those in attendance, including his own family as well as the victim and her family.
The appellate court’s ruling, issued last week, marks the first formal review of the case since the original conviction and sentence. It remains unclear whether the man will seek further review by petitioning the Alabama Supreme Court.
A second case that may not move forward
Prosecutors have said the man was also accused of molesting a second child, a relative of the first victim who was 9 years old at the time of the alleged abuse. However, that child’s family has told prosecutors they do not intend to pursue a second prosecution as long as the appellate courts uphold the original conviction, effectively making this week’s ruling a pivotal moment in whether that second case will ever be charged.
What the ruling means locally
The case has moved through Mobile County’s court system for roughly two years, from initial charges through trial, sentencing and now appellate review. For families in the Chickasaw area who followed the case, the appellate court’s decision offers a measure of finality, at least for now, confirming that the conviction secured by Mobile County prosecutors will stand unless the state’s highest court agrees to take up the matter.
Alabama’s child sexual abuse statutes carry significant mandatory prison time for offenses involving victims under 12, and appellate challenges in such cases typically focus on procedural and evidentiary issues raised during the original trial rather than reweighing the underlying facts.