State v. Brooks

Testimony by a witness regarding an out-of-court statement by a non-witness about the credibility of the victim is not inadmissible. An error by the trial court is harmless when the trial court explicitly indicates that it is not relying on the incorrectly admitted evidence.

Defendant appeals his conviction of numerous charges of first-degree sexual abuse and attempted first-degree rape by claiming that the trial court erred on 3 grounds: (1) dismissed by the Court of Appeals, (2) a witness should not have been able to testify regarding pre-trial statements made by Defendant and a non-witness about the credibility of the victim, and (3) the admissions of the physicians expert opinion about the occurrence of sexual abuse without any physical evidence. On the second ground, the Court ruled that a witness is permitted to testify about an out-of-court statement by a non-witness about the credibility of the victim. The trial court did not err in denying Defendant's motion to exclude such testimony. On the third claim of error, the Court agreed with Defendant that a physician's expert opinion about the existence of sexual abuse without any physical evidence is inadmissible. However, the Court said that this was harmless error because the trial court explicitly stated that it did not rely on the expert opinion in making its decision. Affirmed.