Armstrong v. State

OPINION

Charles R. Armstrong appeals from the denial of his motion for a new trial. Appellant was convicted of the infamous crime against nature for the commission of an act of sodomy upon a seventeen year old.1

Appellant asserts that a new trial is required because the State had not made available for his defense a laboratory report on a pair of underpants worn by the victim showing that no vaseline-type substance was discovered on the underpants. *176At trial, the victim had testified that appellant had smeared a vaseline-type substance “all over my back.” It is appellant’s contention that the…