Opinion ID: 2301994
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Credibility of Christina Bartley

Text: Delarosa contends that the hearing justice erred in finding Bartley's testimony to be credible. He points out that Bartley is an admitted criminal who lied to the police and received an extremely favorable plea offer in exchange for her testimony. He contends that these factors should have discredited her testimony. Delarosa also argues that Bartley's testimony regarding her return trip to the Almy Street area where she picked up Delarosa negates her credibility because it defies belief that she would not have given this information to the police in the first instance, if truthful. [13] As to each of these contentions, we disagree. The record reveals that the hearing justice noted that many details provided by Bartley were corroborated by the testimony of the victims of the robbery. For example, Bartley described the Jason-style mask and the silver gun carried by the individuals in her car, as did the victims. Furthermore, the instances in which Bartley lied to the police pertained not to the robbery at issue but concerned her involvement with Letourneau in other robberies. The hearing justice found that Bartley credibly identified Delarosa, and further found that she provided credible testimony indicating that Delarosa was involved in and conspired with [others] to commit a first-degree robbery. This Court will not `second-guess' supportable credibility assessments of a hearing justice in a probation-revocation hearing. Pona, 13 A.3d at 647 (quoting State v. Jones, 969 A.2d 676, 679 (R.I.2009)); see also State v. Gauthier, 15 A.3d 1004, 1008 (R.I.2011). Such is the case here.