Summary
holding expert testimony did not constitute impermissible vouching where it "provid[ed] the jury information about the ability of a child to remember details" and "provided the jury some perception about [the complaining witnesses’] knowledge of the facts" rather than the truthfulness of their statements
Summary of this case from State v. BarnhardtOpinion
No. 14–1143.
09-10-2015
Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Melinda J. Nye, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Aaron Rogers, Assistant Attorney General, Kirby D. Schmidt, County Attorney, and Erika Allen, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
Affirmed.