Opinion
No. 286, 1998.
June 23, 1999.
Appeal from the Family Court, Sussex County, JS97-0813, 97-6-242.
AFFIRMED
Unpublished Opinion is below.
JERRY FORD, Respondent Below, Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Petitioner Below, Appellee. No. 286, 1998. Supreme Court of Delaware. Submitted: April 20, 1999. Decided: June 23, 1999.
Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 7(d), the name of the appellant is a pseudonym selected by the Court.
Family Court of the State of Delaware in and for Sussex County, File No. JS97-0813, Case No. 97-6-242.
Upon appeal from Family Court.
AFFIRMED.
Before WALSH, HOLLAND, and BERGER, Justices.
ORDER
This 23rd day of June, 1999 upon consideration of the briefs of the parties it appears to the Court that:
(1) Jerry Ford ("Ford") appeals from a decision of the Family Court which adjudged him delinquent on one count of unlawful sexual contact in the second degree. The Family Court subsequently sentenced him to supervised probation and required his registration as a sexual offender pursuant to 11 Del. C. § 4120 and 4336.
(2) In this appeal, Ford attacks the constitutionality of the sexual offender registration statute and also raises claims concerning the admissibility of evidence presented at his trial and sentencing hearing.
(3) The constitutionality of the sexual offender registration statute is controlled by our decision in Coleman v. State, Del.Supr., ___ A.2d ___, 1999 WL 360261 (1999). Accordingly, we find no error in the trial court's imposition of the requirement of sexual offender registration.
(4) We further conclude that the Family Court did not abuse its discretion in excluding extrinsic evidence to impeach the victim's testimony nor in permitting the testimony of Ford's former counselor during the sentencing hearing. We also determine to be without merit Ford's claim that the court's sentence was based on inaccurate or unreliable information. Finally, we conclude that the trial court, sitting as the finder of fact, was entitled to resolve inconsistencies and conflicting testimony. See Pryor v. State, Del.Supr., 453 A.2d 98, 100 (1982). We further conclude that, so resolved, the evidence was clearly sufficient to support the findings of the Family Court.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Family Court be, and the same hereby is, AFFIRMED.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Joseph T. Walsh Justice