State v. Paul B.

Summary

The court affirmed the Appellate Court's judgment, concluding that the defendant's challenge to the police officer's account of the victim's statements was not preserved because the objection at trial differed from the claim raised on appeal. The court further held that, even assuming the expert's testimony about the victims' out-of-court statements was improperly admitted, any error was harmless in light of the strong, corroborated evidence and limiting instructions. The court also concluded that the prosecutor's references to the evidence did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial.