Court Opinion

ID: 9761531
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 01:44:47.300534+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:29:24.123253
License: Public Domain

FLAHERTY, Justice,
dissenting.
I cannot agree with the majority’s failure to characterize prison counselor Reed as an “interested adult.” We should not require that the intensity of interest as an “interested *573adult” equal that of a parent, as one is a blood relationship while the other is that of a trained professional. Rather, the proper test for determining whether one qualifies as an interested adult is whether that person holds the accused’s interest and welfare, as opposed to the prosecution’s interest, as his primary concern.
I believe Mr. Reed met this test. He was a professional counselor, concerned with the problems of troubled youths. He was in no way connected with the prosecution, so there was no risk that his interest would be swayed from the side of the appellant to the side of the prosecution. It cannot be said, as a matter of law, that a prison counselor is so connected with the interests of the prosecution as to render him uninterested in the welfare of the prisoner. Accordingly, I would affirm the judgment of sentence.