State v. Saldana
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
*229SCOTT, Justice.
Camilo Saldana appeals from his conviction of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.-342(e)(i) (1980). At trial appellant admitted that sexual intercourse had occurred but claimed it was consensual. To rebut appellant’s claim, the state presented an expert witness who described the typical post-rape symptoms and behavior of rape victims, and gave her opinion that the complainant was a victim of rape and had not fabricated her allegations. We find that the admission of such testimony requires the reversal of appellant’s conviction, and we…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- United States v. Buddy Joe BarnardCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1974
- State v. MacKSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- State v. LoebachSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
- Cartera v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1978
- Matter of Pittsburgh Action Against RapeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by186 opinions
- State v. MiddletonOregon Supreme Court · 1983
- People v. TaylorNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- United States v. Anthony Damian AzureCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1986
- Duckett v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1990
- State v. MyersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
181 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.