Court Opinion

ID: 9657240
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 20:18:02.891072+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:42.425679
License: Public Domain

DAY, J.
(concurring). I concur in the result of the majority opinion affirming the conviction of the Defendant for sexual assault. However, I disagree with the statement in the majority opinion (majority opinion at 256-57):
In sum, the expert witness must not be allowed to convey to the jury his or her own beliefs as to the veracity of the complainant with respect to the assault. See State v. Romero, 147 Wis. 2d 264, 432 N.W.2d 899 (1988).
*263For the reasons given in my dissent, Part II, in State v. Romero, issued this date, I would hold that an expert may give their opinion as to the truthfulness of young victims of sexual crimes, if in the opinion of the trial judge such expert’s contact with the victim had been sufficient to permit such opinion testimony. It should be subject to an instruction that it is only an opinion and that the ultimate question of the truthfulness of a witness is for the jury to decide.
I am authorized to state that Justices DONALD W. STEINMETZ and LOUIS J. CECI join in this concurring opinion.