Prior statements in 1st degree criminal sexual conduct trial

Are prior inconsistent statements admissible in 1st degree criminal sexual conduct conviction?

Defendant challenged his convictions of 1st degree criminal sexual conduct and contributing to the delinquency of a child, arguing that the trial court plainly erred by admitting the victim’s out of court statements as evidence at his jury rial on the offenses, alleging they were inconsistent with the victim’s trial testimony.  Defendant did not object to the admission of those statements.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that defendant failed to establish that the trial court’s failure to exclude the challenged statements sua sponte–after he expressly agreed to their admission–was error that was clear of obvious.  Affirmed.

State v. Haddock, A18-2026, Nobles County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

DISCLAIMER: Throughout this website, there are statements on various laws. Please note that this is not legal advice, and no reliance should be taken thereon, and an attorney client relationship is not established hereby. Further, please note that these legal statements may not currently be up to date, because the laws can change daily, and this website does not. Thus, you will always need to actually retain a lawyer to establish an attorney client relationship, to rely upon any advice, and to obtain up-to-date legal research. Thank you.