State v. D.W.N.

In this case the prosecution explicitly— and repeatedly — asked one of its witnesses for his opinion as to the credibility of the alleged victim of a sexual assault, and highlighted the witness’ testimony that he believed the victim in its closing arguments. The State candidly admits that the prosecutor’s actions were improper.

The victim first reported the incident for which D.W.N. was convicted more than two years after it occurred (after earlier, specific denials). No physical evidence or other witness provided independent corroboration for her accusations. The prose*830cution’s case depended…