Williams v. Laney

“Another witness’s description of the complaining witness as a ‘victim’ conveys an opinion that the complaining witness is telling the truth.” State v. Sperou, 442 P.3d. 581 (2019).

Petitioner sought post-conviction relief for 2012 convictions of sexual abuse and rape. Petitioner alleged inadequate assistance and assigned error to all conclusions made by the post-conviction court. Petitioner argued that defense counsel failed to object to repeated use of the word “victim” throughout the proceeding. The Court considered Petitioner’s allegations in light of new legal analysis from State v. Sperou, 442 P.3d. 518 (2019). “ . . . another witness’s description of the complaining witness as a ‘victim’ conveys an opinion that the complaining witness is telling the truth.” The Court analyzed usage of the word “victim” throughout the proceeding and found there is not restriction on the broad usage of “victim.” The Court reasoned that counsel and witnesses adequately and appropriately handled the use of the word “victim,” and Petitioner did not prove resulting prejudice. The Court held a witness may not refer to the complaining witness as “victim,” as it conveys an opinion on the complaining witness’s credibility for truthfulness. The post-conviction court did not err in denying post-conviction relief. Affirmed.