STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ROY FRAZIER II AND BIONKA MCGAUGHY - Articles

All Content

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ROY FRAZIER II AND BIONKA MCGAUGHY

Posted by: Azya Thornton on May 21, 2025

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys 1: Katherine Oberembt (on appeal), and Lauren Pasley (at trial), Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Roy Frazier II.

Attorneys 2: Phyllis Aluko, Chief Shelby County Public Defender; and Tony N. Brayton (on appeal) and Amy Mayne (at trial), Assistant Shelby County Public Defenders, for the appellant, Bionka McGaughy.

Attorneys 3: Jonathan Skrmetti, Attorney General and Reporter; Ronald L. Coleman, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Steve Mulroy, District Attorney General; and Venecia Patterson and Tanisha Johnson, Assistant District Attorneys General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge(s): HOLLOWAY

In June 2021, the Shelby County Grand Jury issued a three-count indictment charging Roy Frazier II (“Defendant Frazier”) with two counts of aggravated rape of a child (Counts 1 and 2) and Bionka McGaughy (“Defendant McGaughy”) with child abuse or neglect of a child eight years of age or less (Count 3). Following a joint trial, a jury convicted Defendant Frazier of aggravated rape of a child in Count 1 and the lesser-included offense of aggravated sexual battery in Count 2, for which he received a sentence of life without parole plus twenty years. The jury convicted Defendant McGaughy of child neglect of a child eight years of age or less, for which the trial court imposed a sentence of two years to be served in the workhouse. On appeal, Defendant Frazier contends that: (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions for aggravated rape of a child and aggravated sexual battery; (2) the trial court erred by admitting multiple hearsay statements; (3) the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on identity; (4) the trial court misapplied two enhancement factors in sentencing; and (5) the trial court abused its discretion by imposing consecutive sentencing. For her part, Defendant McGaughy argues that the evidence is insufficient to support her conviction for child neglect of a child eight years of age or less. Following a thorough review, we affirm the judgments of conviction in all respects.

Attachments: