State v. W. Whitaker

Summary

The court upheld the admission of a federal prisoner’s remote testimony because pandemic-related health and safety concerns supplied a case-specific necessity and the testimony remained reliable through oath, visibility, and cross-examination. It also upheld admission of the victim’s forensic-interview and medical-examination statements because her substantial lapses in recalling material details made the prior statements inconsistent with her trial testimony. The court reversed the sexual-assault conviction because it duplicated the sexual-intercourse-without-consent conviction arising from the same act and remanded for an amended judgment.