Summary 2010 WY 87

Summary of Decision issued June 28, 2010

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Sweet v. State

Citation: 2010 WY 87

Docket Number: S-09-0021

Appeal from the District Court of Campbell County, the Honorable John R. Perry, Judge.

Representing Sweet: Diane Lozano, Public Defender; Tina Kerin, Appellate Counsel; Wyoming Public Defender Program.

Representing State: Bruce A. Salzburg, Wyoming Attorney General; Terry L. Armitage, Deputy Attorney General; D. Michael Pauling, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Jenny L. Craig, Assistant Attorney General.

Facts/Discussion: Sweet was convicted by a jury of one count of sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree.

Improper vouching evidence: Sweet objected to the recorded questioning of him by the Deputy Sheriff wherein the Sheriff repeatedly stated that he believed the victim’s version of the events. The State conceded the Court’s abundant authority prohibiting vouching. It maintained that no decision from the Court addressed the question of whether the introduction as evidence of a police interview in which officers employed such accepted interviewing techniques as expressing disbelief of an interviewee’s story. Both Sweet and the State recognized that in Pendleton v. State, the Court considered a factual situation somewhat similar to the instant case. In the instant case, the Court held that the Deputy Sheriff’s numerous statements in the recorded interview and his trial testimony violated in a clear and obvious way the Court’s long-standing rules prohibiting a witness to express opinions about the accused’s mendacity and guilt and about the alleged victim’s truthfulness and credibility. Such statements invade the exclusive province of the jury to determine the credibility of the witnesses and the evidence. Credibility was the pervasive issue for the jury in the instant trial. In the Court’s view, a reasonable possibility existed that in the absence of the deputy’s statements in the recorded interview and in his trial testimony which commented on the alleged victim’s truthfulness and the accused’s mendacity and guilt the verdict might have been more favorable to Sweet.
Jury instruction: The instruction read “Corroboration of an alleged victim’s testimony is not necessary to obtain a conviction for sexual assault.” The Court disapproved of a similar jury instruction in Story v. State and the Court stated that on retrial, the trial court shall not give that instruction.
Cumulative error: The specific excerpts pointed out by Sweet did not fit the Court’s definition of victim impact testimony. The testimony was otherwise relevant describing the circumstances at the time of and shortly after the incident and not how the incident had further impacted the victim or her mother. Sweet also complained of prosecutor and district court bias toward the victim when it used terms of endearment such as “My dear” and “Hon.” The testimony regarding Sweet’s actions after the incident and his subsequent arrest were admissible because a jury could have reasonably inferred that the actions constituted fleeing from the scene of a crime. Referring to Sweet’s actions as an “assault” or “sexual assault” was not error. The Court concluded that no error occurred with respect to any of Sweet’s claims and none of the trial events he challenged carried any potential to prejudice him or otherwise affect the outcome of his trial.

Conclusion: The Court held that the State’s presentation of improper vouching evidence constituted plain error and therefore, the Court reversed and remanded for a new trial. The Court addressed the remaining issues because they might recur on retrial.

Reversed and remanded.

J. Golden delivered the decision.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/2438ky6 .

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. Please note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance using the Universal Citation format, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]