State of Connecticut v. Daniel W. E. — Espinosa, J., Concurring

Summary

Justice Espinosa concurs in affirming the defendant's conviction and agrees with part I of the court's opinion. She disagrees with the majority's modification of the constancy of accusation doctrine, reasoning that the existing rule sufficiently protects defendants while allowing trial courts to balance probative value and prejudice. She concludes that the majority improperly transfers that discretion to defendants and departs from the prevailing approach in other jurisdictions.