Robert A. Neace v. State of Indiana

Summary

The Indiana Court of Appeals considers Robert A. Neace’s appeal from his conviction for Level 4 felony child molesting. The court holds that testimony from a forensic interviewer and a sexual-assault nurse regarding children’s truthfulness and the absence of coaching constituted impermissible vouching under Indiana Evidence Rule 704(b), and that the defense did not open the door to the testimony. Because the error was not harmless, the court reverses the conviction and remands for a new trial.

Holdings

1. Neace's voir dire questions about whether jurors would automatically believe a child, together with his isolated reference to children being coached after a prospective juror mentioned manipulation, did not leave the jury with a false or misleading impression and therefore did not open the door to otherwise inadmissible vouching testimony.
2. The forensic interviewer's testimony that E.H. did not exhibit signs of coaching and the forensic nurse's testimony that children tell the truth were impermissible vouching testimony because they effectively commented on E.H.'s truthfulness.
3. The erroneous admission of the vouching testimony was not harmless because the State's case depended substantially on E.H.'s credibility, the independent evidence of guilt was weak, and the testimony likely affected the jury's verdict.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defense counsel's voir dire questions and isolated reference to possible coaching opened the door to otherwise inadmissible vouching testimony under Indiana Evidence Rule 704(b).
2. Whether the erroneous admission of the vouching testimony was harmless.
3. Whether the trial court erred in denying Neace's motion to remove a juror who disclosed during trial that he knew E.H.'s father.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded