State v. KonyAnnotate this Case
After a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of three counts of sexual assault in the first degree and three counts of sexual assault in the third degree. Defendant appealed, arguing, among other things, that expert testimony regarding child sexual abuse is no longer relevant. The intermediate court of appeals (ICA) affirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the trial court did not err in admitting the expert testimony regarding the unique characteristics of child sexual abuse victims to assist the jury in comprehending delayed reporting; and (2) although Defendant did not properly preserve for appeal his argument that the expert testimony presented in this case was unfairly prejudicial or misleading, the Court provided guidance in light of the ICA’s analysis of this issue.