State v. Stancil
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Per curiam
In a sexual offense prosecution involving a child victim, the trial court should not admit expert opinion that sexual abuse has in fact occurred because, absent physical evidence supporting a diagnosis of sexual abuse, such testimony is an impermissible opinion regarding the victim’s credibility. State v. Trent, 320 N.C. 610, 359 S.E.2d 463 (1987); State v. Grover, 142 N.C. App. 411, 543 S.E.2d 179, aff’d per curiam, 354 N.C. 354, 553 S.E.2d 679 (2001). However, an expert witness may testify, upon a proper foundation, as to the profiles of sexually abused children and whether a particular…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. OdomSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. WalkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
- State v. KennedySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
- State v. HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1992
- State v. AgualloSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by70 opinions
- State v. BlizzardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
- State v. ToweSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2012
- State v. BuchholtzSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
- State v. HammettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2006
- In Re ButtsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
65 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.