## Facts

- Adrian Haywood was accused of having sexual intercourse with F.M., who was 15 years old at the time of the incident.
- According to the trial evidence, F.M. asked Haywood to drive her friend home, and F.M. rode in the car with Haywood.
- After dropping the friend off, Haywood took F.M. to a hotel, where the two had sexual intercourse.
- Haywood then drove F.M. home and told her not to tell anyone.
- Haywood was indicted for statutory rape, child molestation, and rape.
- Before trial, the State filed a motion in limine seeking to bar Haywood from introducing evidence that he believed F.M. was over the age of consent.
- The trial court granted the motion in limine and excluded mistake-of-age evidence.
- The jury found Haywood guilty of statutory rape and child molestation and not guilty of rape.
- At sentencing, the trial court merged the child-molestation conviction into the statutory-rape conviction and vacated the child-molestation sentence.
- Haywood appealed, arguing the trial court erred by excluding evidence of his belief about F.M.’s age.

## Issues

1. Did the trial court err by granting the State’s motion in limine excluding evidence that Haywood believed the victim was over the age of consent in a statutory-rape prosecution?
2. Was any claimed error in excluding that evidence reviewable as to the rape and child-molestation charges?

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Georgia affirmed.
- The court held that, for statutory rape, the State is not required to prove the defendant knew the victim was under 16, and a reasonable belief that the victim was old enough is not a defense; therefore, evidence offered to show Haywood’s belief about age was irrelevant and properly excluded.
- The court held that arguments about the relevance of the excluded evidence to rape and child molestation were moot because Haywood was acquitted of rape and the child-molestation conviction merged into the statutory-rape conviction with no separate sentence remaining.

## Legal Principles

- Under O.C.G.A. § 16-6-3, statutory rape is committed by engaging in sexual intercourse with a person under 16 who is not the defendant’s spouse.
- The defendant’s knowledge or belief about the victim’s age is not an element of statutory rape in Georgia, and a reasonable mistake about age is not a defense.
- Evidence offered solely to show a mistake about the victim’s age is irrelevant to statutory rape and may be excluded.
- Rulings on admissibility of evidence, including rulings on motions in limine, are reviewed for abuse of discretion; excluding irrelevant evidence is not an abuse of discretion.
- Appellate claims tied only to counts resulting in acquittal or merged convictions are moot where no independent conviction or sentence is affected.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed Haywood’s statutory-rape conviction because Georgia law does not make the defendant’s knowledge of the victim’s age an element of statutory rape, so the trial court acted within its discretion in excluding mistake-of-age evidence, and any related claims about rape or child molestation were moot due to acquittal and merger.


Haywood v. State, 642 S.E.2d 203 (2007)