September 14, 1998
LOUIS BOLANOS AND WILLIAM GUZMAN, APPELLANTS,
UNITED STATES, APPELLEE.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT, COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY, J. [718 A2d Page 533]
Before Schwelb, Ruiz, and Reid, Associate Judges.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Per Curiam:
Following a jury trial, appellants William Guzman and Louis Bolanos were each convicted of two counts of rape while armed in violation of D.C.Code §§ 22-2801, -3202 (1996), and of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence (PFCV), in violation of D.C.Code § 22-3204(b). *fn1 On appeal, both appellants contend that the trial judge committed reversible error by admitting into evidence, over objection, testimony that appellants assaulted and beat the complaining witness approximately one week before the alleged rapes.
This contention is addressed in detail in Judge Reid's lead opinion and in the concurring opinions of Judge Schwelb and Judge Ruiz. A majority of the court believes that the evidence of the beating was relevant to the issue whether the sexual contact between appellants and the complaining witness was consensual, as appellants claimed, or rape, as the prosecutor contended. The court is also of the opinion that, even if the strictures of Drew v. United States, 118 U.S.App.D.C. 11, 331 F.2d 85 (1964), and Roper v. United States, 564 A.2d 726, 731 (D.C. 1989), apply to this case *fn2, the requirements of these decisions have been satisfied.
The court unanimously holds that, for the reasons stated in the lead opinion by Judge Reid, none of the remaining contentions presented by either appellant warrants reversal [718 A2d Page 534]
of any of the convictions. Accordingly, the judgments appealed from are