Benjamin John Romero, Petitioner v. the People of the State of Colorado, Respondent

Summary

The court held that a trial court does not commit plain error by giving the jury unrestricted access to recorded statements during deliberations when the defendant did not object. It also held that testimony explaining sexual-predator grooming is based on specialized knowledge and therefore cannot be admitted as lay testimony without qualifying the witness as an expert. Because the improperly admitted grooming testimony was not harmless in light of the equivocal evidence and its use to establish mens rea, the court reversed the convictions and remanded for a new trial.