Summary
The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed Lee Lloyd Lopez's conviction for third-degree sexual assault and remanded for a new trial. The court held that the prosecution's forensic interviewer impermissibly vouched for the alleged victim's credibility, and it addressed additional evidentiary and constitutional issues for possible retrial.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Huylar impermissibly vouched for CS's credibility and whether the error was harmful.
- Whether exclusion of evidence concerning CS's 1998 report that she observed her mother masturbating violated Lopez's constitutional right to present a defense or constituted an abuse of discretion.
- Whether the prosecutor committed misconduct by eliciting the full content of Lopez's statement to police, including his statement that he had been sexually abused as a child, and whether the trial court improperly changed its prior evidentiary ruling.
Holdings
- Huylar's testimony that she used a scientific methodology to ensure information was true and accurate and that she found no elements indicating a false allegation impermissibly vouched for CS's credibility. The vouching was harmful because credibility was central, the evidence was not overwhelming, and there was no physical evidence; reversal and a new trial were required.
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion by excluding the evidence. The prior incident did not provide a meaningful alternative source for the simple sexual knowledge involved in the present allegation, did not show fabrication, and did not support the speculative motive theory advanced by Lopez.
- The prosecutor did not commit misconduct. The prosecutor complied with the order barring use of the childhood-abuse statement in the State's case-in-chief, and the defense opened the door by presenting Lopez's characterization of his police statement as a denial. The trial court did not improperly change its ruling and acted within its discretion in admitting the complete statement.
Key quotations
“no "forensic interviewer" may testify directly or inferentially on whether an alleged victim is credible. The assessment of credibility is exclusively for the trier of fact.” (98 P.3d at 151)
“Ms. Huylar's testimony, in the two specifically identified instances and in the instances we have identified above, constituted harmful vouching and reversible error” (98 P.3d at 150)
Factual background
CS, age ten, alleged that Lopez touched her private area while wrestling and tickling her at the home of her mother, Lopez's former wife. CS disclosed the incident eleven days later, and there was no physical evidence; the case therefore turned largely on the credibility contest between CS and Lopez. A prosecution social worker and forensic interviewer, Lynn Huylar, testified about her methodology and stated that she found no elements suggesting a false allegation, while the prosecutor relied heavily on that testimony in closing argument.
Procedural history
Lopez was convicted in the district court of third-degree sexual assault and sentenced to six to eight years in the Wyoming State Penitentiary. He appealed, asserting three issues. The Supreme Court of Wyoming held that the prosecution witness impermissibly vouched for the alleged victim's credibility and that the error was harmful; it also addressed the other issues because they could recur on retrial.
Remand instructions
Remand for a new trial. The opinion also provides guidance concerning the admissibility of evidence and the prohibition against credibility vouching on retrial.