State v. Bickart

[¶ 1] Tina Bickart appeals from a judgment of conviction of gross sexual assault (Class A), and related sexual crimes, entered after a jury trial in the Superior Court (York County, Fritzsche, J.). Bickart asserts that the court erred by: (1) failing to exclude the testimony of the State’s expert palm print identification witness; (2) admitting into evidence nude *185photographs of Bickart and her husband taken prior to the commission of the crimes; and (3) failing to exclude the testimony of her husband, Stephen, regarding marital communications. She also argues that there was insufficient…