Opinion ID: 2272101
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Competency Hearing and Trial

Text: On February 10, 2006, a grand jury issued an indictment charging Mr. Rivera with seven offenses, including second-degree sexual assault of Deborah (count 1), two counts of first-degree sexual assault of Tracy (counts 2 and 4), two counts of second-degree sexual assault of Tracy (counts 3 and 5), and two counts of second-degree sexual assault (counts 6 and 7) of Elaine. The indictment charged defendant with committing each of the aforementioned counts on a specific date between the 1st day of June, 2005 and the 31st day of August, 2005   . Before trial the trial justice conducted a hearing upon defendant's motion to determine the competency of each of the three complaining witnesses. [3] These witnesses and a defense expert, Ronald L. Stewart, M.D., testified at the hearing. At the competency hearing, Deborah listed the members of her family, described her pets, and she recited her address. Deborah also was able to recall what she had for breakfast. She communicated an observation that the prosecutor was holding a blue pen, and she stated that it was bad to tell a lie. Deborah, however, did get somewhat confused about what she had eaten the previous day, and she had never heard the word prosecutor before. Deborah also had difficulty answering some other questions and naming the prosecutor, and she admitted that she rehearsed her testimony with the prosecutor. Tracy, during the competency hearing, was able to state her address, the people with whom she lives, and her pets. She also was able to identify the prosecutor's pen and paper. Tracy stated that she was a woman and the prosecutor was a man, but she was unable to explain how to tell men and women apart. Tracy promised to tell the truth, but was unable to define the word promise. Tracy also was unable to correctly describe the role of the judge, prosecutor, or lawyer. Tracy contradicted herself at several points during the hearing. She stated that she had tuna fish for lunch, and later testified that she had not yet eaten. She also testified that she knew Deborah, and later stated that she did not know Deborah. When asked whether she would be able to recognize defendant, Tracy answered no. Also, when asked, If you were asked a question about what you did in the summer of 2005 and you can't remember what you did in 2005, what are you going to say? Tracy responded, I worked that day. Doctor Stewart testified that he heard just over half the testimony, and on the basis of his observations and the documents, interviews, and reports provided to him, he could not reach an opinion about the competency of the complaining witnesses. Doctor Stewart said that neurological testing was required to assess the cognitive ability and reliability of the complaining witnesses and stated later that he had been asking    frequently for qualified experts in the respective field to assess the complaining witnesses. Defense counsel, however, did not request neurological testing and instead stated, the Court would be in the best position to determine the need, if any, to have the alleged victims further examined. At the conclusion of the competency hearing, on May 22, 2007, the Superior Court found all three complaining witnesses competent to testify and denied defendant's motion to sever the counts. On May 23, 2007, after the jury was empaneled, an eight-day trial began. On June 4, 2007, the jury returned a guilty verdict on two counts of first-degree sexual assault, four counts of second-degree sexual assault, and one count of simple assault or battery. On July 20, 2007, the trial justice denied defendant's motion for a new trial. On August 7, 2007, the trial justice sentenced defendant to life imprisonment for counts 2 and 4 and fifteen years to serve on counts 3 and 5, all such terms to run concurrently. He also sentenced defendant to two concurrent terms of fifteen years on counts 6 and 7, said terms to run consecutively to counts 2, 3, 4, and 5. Finally, he sentenced defendant to one year, consecutive to all other counts for the simple-assault conviction. This sentence amounts to life imprisonment, plus sixteen years. We discuss additional facts in the context of the issues raised on appeal.