Opinion ID: 4523191
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Prosecutor’s Use of Leading Questions

Text: [¶16] Hansen also contends that the prosecutor’s leading questions during the direct examination of the child victim compromised his right to a fair trial. [¶17] Trial judges have “broad discretion in determining the scope” of the direct examination of a minor witness by the prosecution. See State v. Roman, 622 A.2d 96, 101 (Me. 1993) (quotation marks omitted). Similarly, “the State is accorded much latitude in attempting to elicit relevant testimony from a child witness.” Id. In cases involving “embarrassing sex crimes, where a child would be hesitant to testify, leading questions may be particularly appropriate.” Id. (quotation marks omitted). [¶18] Although the victim initially struggled to describe the nature of the sexual contact to which Hansen subjected her, she never denied that Hansen had sexually abused her, and her testimony remained internally consistent in 8 many respects throughout. See State v. Spooner, 666 A.2d 863, 865-66 (Me. 1995); Roman, 622 A.2d at 101; State v. Murray, 559 A.2d 361, 362 (Me. 1989). To the extent that there were inconsistencies in the victim’s testimony that could cast doubt on her credibility, “[t]he responsibility for weighing that testimony reside[d] with the jury.” Murray, 559 A.2d at 362. [¶19] On this record, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the State leeway to use leading questions in conducting its direct examination of the child victim, and the State’s leading questions did not violate Hansen’s right to a fair trial. See, e.g., Roman, 622 A.2d at 101 (discussing the “broad discretion” afforded trial justices and the “latitude” given to prosecutors in cases involving testimony by a child victim of sexual abuse); Lisenba v. California, 314 U.S. 219, 236 (1941) (“[D]enial of due process is the failure to observe that fundamental fairness essential to the very concept of justice. In order to declare a denial of it we must find that the absence of that fairness fatally infected the trial; the acts complained of must be of such quality as necessarily prevents a fair trial.”).