Court Opinion

ID: 9655623
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 19:18:07.816951+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:20.762450
License: Public Domain

OTIS, Justice.
This is an appeal from a conviction for criminal sexual conduct in the third degree in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.344(c) (1980). We reverse.
By way of rebutting appellant’s claim that the complainant consented to sexual intercourse, the state introduced the expert testimony of a physician which included a description of the so-called “rape trauma syndrome.”
The doctor was permitted to render his opinion that complainant’s behavior, subsequent to the sexual encounter, consisting of anxiety, nightmares, trouble sleeping and trouble concentrating, and fear of being followed, were symptoms consistent with rape trauma syndrome.
We hold that the introduction of this evidence was fundamental error and sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial for the reasons set forth in State v. Saldana, 324 N.W.2d 227 (Minn.1982).
Reversed and remanded.