Chapman v. State, 117 Nev. 1

Summary

The Supreme Court of Nevada affirmed Melvin Chapman's convictions for sexual assault of a minor and lewdness with a child. The court rejected his challenges to the denial of an independent psychological examination of the victim, the exclusion of evidence concerning the victim's sexual knowledge, and the State's alleged Brady violation involving lost answering-machine tapes. The court concluded that Chapman had not shown an abuse of discretion, that the excluded evidence was insufficiently specific or probative, and that no Brady violation or prejudicial loss of evidence occurred.

Holdings

1. A district court may deny a defendant's request for an independent psychological examination of a child victim when the defendant fails to demonstrate a compelling reason for the examination, applying the relevant Keeney factors as clarified by Koerschner. Because the State did not rely on a qualifying expert, the alleged evidence had corroboration, and the asserted parental hostility did not provide a sufficient basis to question the victim's veracity, denial of the examination was not an abuse of discretion.
2. Evidence of a child victim's prior sexual experiences or knowledge may be admitted to counter the inference that the child could not describe a sexual assault without having experienced it, but only when the evidence is sufficiently specific and indicative of an ability to contrive the accusation. The evidence offered by Chapman did not satisfy that standard and was properly excluded.
3. The State's failure to preserve or disclose answering-machine tapes did not constitute a Brady violation because the State never possessed the tapes. Dismissal was also unwarranted because Chapman failed to show materiality, bad faith, or prejudice, and the tapes would at most have supported an alternative fabrication theory rather than directly exculpating him.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court abused its discretion by denying Chapman's request for an independent psychological examination of the child victim.
2. Whether the district court improperly excluded evidence of independent sources of the victim's knowledge of sexual activities and male anatomy.
3. Whether the State's failure to preserve or disclose answering-machine tapes violated Brady and required dismissal of the charges.

Disposition

affirmed