State v. William Gilbert

Supreme Court No. 2025-22-C.A. (P1/20-1751A) · Supreme Court of Rhode Island · April 30, 2026 · No. 2025-22-C.A. (P1/20-1751A)

Summary

The Rhode Island Supreme Court affirmed William Gilbert’s conviction for first-degree sexual assault. The court held that testimony about statements made by the defendant’s roommate to the complainant after the alleged assault was not hearsay because it was not offered for the truth of the matter asserted, and it also concluded that the hearsay objection was adequately preserved.

Court
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Writing for the Court
Chief Justice Paul A. Suttell; Chief Justice Suttell; Justice Goldberg; Justice Robinson; Justice Lynch Prata; Justice Long
Jurisdiction
Rhode Island
Decision date
April 30, 2026
Docket number
2025-22-C.A. (P1/20-1751A)
Procedural posture
Defendant appealed from a Providence County Superior Court judgment of conviction for first-degree sexual assault after a jury trial, challenging the admission of testimony recounting statements made by his roommate to the complainant after the alleged assault.
Standard of review
Evidentiary rulings are reviewed for abuse of discretion. The Supreme Court will not interfere unless a clear abuse of discretion appears, and there is no abuse when some grounds supporting the ruling appear in the record.
Precedential value
published
Parties
William Gilbert v. State of Rhode Island
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

hearsayevidenceappellate procedurepreservation of errorstandard of review

Practice areas

criminal lawevidenceappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the defendant's objections to the complainant's testimony about Diluglio's statements were sufficiently specific to preserve the hearsay issue for appellate review.
  2. Whether testimony that Diluglio told the complainant to leave the apartment was hearsay because it was offered for the truth of the matter asserted, or instead was admissible to show the effect of the statement on the complainant and explain her subsequent conduct.
  3. If the testimony was hearsay, whether its admission constituted harmless error.

Holdings

  1. The hearsay issue was preserved even though defense counsel stated only "objection" because the specific ground was apparent from the context of the testimony and the trial justice understood the objections as hearsay objections.
  2. The trial justice did not abuse his discretion by admitting the complainant's testimony that Diluglio told her to leave the apartment because the statements were not offered for the truth of the matter asserted and therefore were not hearsay.
  3. The Court did not reach harmless-error analysis because it concluded that the challenged testimony was not hearsay.

Key quotations

However, “an out-of-court statement that is not offered for the truth of the matter asserted but for some other purpose—such as to show notice or the effect of the statement upon the listener—is not hearsay.” (at 12-13)
Because we conclude that the testimony was not offered for its truth, and thus was not hearsay, we need not address this contention. (at 17)

Factual background

The complainant, a sixteen-year-old who had been in and out of Department of Children, Youth and Families placements, was staying in Gilbert's apartment. She testified that Gilbert held her at gunpoint in a car, threatened her, and sexually assaulted her. The next morning, she told Gilbert's roommate, David Diluglio, what had happened; Diluglio cried and told her to leave the apartment and get out as soon as possible. The trial court admitted her testimony about Diluglio's statements, and the jury convicted Gilbert.

Procedural history

A grand jury indicted Gilbert on one count of first-degree sexual assault on June 15, 2020. Following a jury trial from April 24 through April 26, 2023, the Superior Court entered a judgment of conviction and sentenced Gilbert to fifty years, with twenty-five years to serve and twenty-five years suspended, plus probation. Gilbert timely appealed, and the Supreme Court of Rhode Island affirmed.

Remand instructions

The papers in the case may be remanded to the Superior Court.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Rhode Island Supreme Court