Case Title: State v. Percy

Citation: 

Docket Number: 88-438

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 1990-04-01T00:00:00Z

Document:
NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under V.R.A.P.
40 as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont Reports.
Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Vermont Supreme
Court, 111 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05602 of any errors in order
that corrections may be made before this opinion goes to press.


                                No. 88-438


State of Vermont                             Supreme Court

                                             On Appeal from
     v.                                      District Court of Vermont,
                                             Unit No. 1, Windsor Circuit

Robert Lyle Percy                            April Term, 1990


George F. Ellison, J.

Jeffrey L. Amestoy, Attorney General, and David E. Tartter, Assistant
  Attorney General, Montpelier, for plaintiff-appellee

Walter M. Morris, Jr., Defender General, and William A. Nelson, Appellate
 Defender, Montpelier, for defendant-appellant


PRESENT:  Allen, C.J., Peck, Gibson, Dooley and Morse, JJ.


     PECK, J.  Defendant appeals his conviction, after a retrial by jury, of
sexual assault in violation of 13 V.S.A. { 3252.  We affirm.
     Defendant raises five claims on appeal: (1) that the trial court's
instruction that the jury had a "duty to reconcile conflicting testimonies"
violated defendant's right to due process of law; (2) that the court erred
in refusing to suppress a photograph of defendant obtained through a
nontestimonial identification order; (3) that the court erred in excluding
defendant's expert evidence on the reliability of eyewitness
identification; (4) that he was denied a fair trial by the trial court's
failure to excuse a potential juror for cause; (5) that the court's
imposition of a greater sentence following retrial violated his right to due
process of law.
     On December 7, 1980, the victim in this case was abducted and raped.
Two weeks later, defendant was charged with sexual assault and kidnapping.
A jury trial began October 29, 1981.  In that trial, defendant claimed he
suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) resulting from his
military service in Vietnam, and that during the assault, he had experienced
a PTSD-induced flashback that caused his actions on the evening of the
crime.  The jury returned verdicts of not guilty on the charge of
kidnapping and guilty on the charge of sexual assault.
     Approximately four years later, in State v. Percy, 146 Vt. 475,