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

Heading: The Mother’s “First Complaint” Testimony

Text: [¶20] Hansen next argues that the court allowed testimony by the victim’s mother that violated the first complaint rule and constituted 9 inadmissible hearsay. Because Hansen never raised an objection to this testimony, we review the trial court’s actions for obvious error. State v. Hall, 2017 ME 210, ¶ 25, 172 A.3d 467. “[T]o vacate a conviction based on the obvious error standard of review, there must be (1) an error, (2) that is plain, and (3) that affects substantial rights. If these conditions are met, we will exercise our discretion to notice an unpreserved error only if we also conclude that (4) the error seriously affects the fairness and integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” Id. ¶ 26 (quotation marks omitted). [¶21] The first complaint rule “authorizes the admission of the fact of a complaint of sexual assault and the reported time and place of the assault for purposes of corroborating a victim’s testimony, but only to rebut the assumption that, without a complaint, no crime occurred.” State v. Fahnley, 2015 ME 82, ¶ 21, 119 A.3d 727; see also Commonwealth v. King, 834 N.E.2d 1175, 1187-89 (Mass. 2005). Because first complaint testimony is offered only to corroborate the fact that a complaint was made, such testimony “is not offered for its truth, and therefore is not hearsay.” Fahnley, 2015 ME 82, ¶ 20, 119 A.3d 727. [¶22] After carefully reviewing the transcript, we are satisfied that the statement Hansen challenges on appeal, although graphic, did not identify 10 Hansen, was a bare statement of the type of contact alleged, and did not violate the first complaint rule. See State v. Tripp, 634 A.2d 1318, 1321 (Me. 1994). Moreover, the details in the statement could be considered “necessary to identify the complaint as being relevant to the charge on which the accused [wa]s being tried.” State v. Joel H., 2000 ME 139, ¶ 23, 755 A.2d 520 (quotation marks omitted). The trial court did not err in admitting this testimony in evidence. [¶23] However, we take this opportunity to emphasize that when first complaint testimony is offered, the proponent should “be allowed to lead the witness to avoid eliciting testimony regarding any details,” and should “ask the witness four questions: (1) Did the victim tell you that [she or he] had been sexually assaulted? (2) When did the victim tell you? (3) Did the victim tell you where the assault occurred? and (4) Did the victim tell you when the assault occurred?” Fahnley, 2015 ME 82, ¶ 26, 119 A.3d 727. This constitutes the “best practice for offering first complaint evidence.” Id.