Supreme Court of Vermont
State of Vermont v. John E. Recor
May 20, 1988150 Vt. 40
Summary
The court affirmed the sexual-assault conviction, holding that the defendant failed to establish speedy-trial prejudice and that his evidentiary claims either lacked preserved error or involved permissible evidence. The court also held that hearsay recounted by an expert may be admitted under V.R.E. 703 for the limited purpose of explaining the basis of the expert's opinion, although the jury should receive a limiting instruction. No separate opinions were filed.
Holding
- Speedy trial. The defendant did not establish a constitutional speedy-trial violation because he showed no prejudice to his defense at trial and did not timely demand an immediate trial.
- Prior bad act and bias evidence. The trial court properly allowed the complaining witness to explain that the defendant's alleged prior assault was a reason for her hostility because the defense had opened the door by eliciting both the bias and its asserted cause.
- Expert testimony concerning credibility. Although the expert's statement that consistency gave her a sense that the alleged events occurred appeared to implicate the prohibition on expert testimony about a child's truthfulness, the issue was unpreserved and did not amount to plain error.
- Expert basis testimony and hearsay. The expert's detailed account of statements made by the complaining witness was admissible under V.R.E. 703 as limited-purpose basis testimony, not as proof of the truth of the underlying statements; the trial court therefore did not err in overruling the hearsay objection.
Docket 86-379
Cited authorities
- 12 Vt. L. Rev. 485
Cited by
- State of Vermont v. Dennis Malshuk, Ii
- Harley Neel, M.D. v. Edward Sun, M.D. and Kathleen Sun
- State of Vermont v. Joshua J. Muhammad
- Paul Velardo v. Sarah Ovitt
- The State of New Hampshire v. John Melcher
- Velardo v. Ovitt
- Calvin E. Taylor, Appellant v. the State of Nevada, Respondent
- State of Vermont v. Elsie Oscarson