Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of aggravated criminal sexual abuse of his niece, who said the abuse started when she was age 8 or 9. Court did not abuse its discretion in allowing victim, age 17 at time of trial, to testify with a service dog under the ADA. At pretrial hearing on Defendant's motion in limine, victim's mother told judge, prior to trial, that dog assisted in coping with a mental illness. Victim testified in clear view of Defendant and was subject to extensive cross-examination. Defendant's confrontation rights were not violated. Court adequately compensated for any potential sympathy for victim from dog's presence, by detailed instructions to jury, such that Defendant's right to fair trial was not violated.Court did not abuse its discretion in allowing victim's testimony that she thought she'd be dead before the abuse came out, because it can logically be interpreted to mean that victim thought the abuse would never come to light during her lifetime. Defense counsel cross-examined police officer about police responding to a report that victim had been making suicidal comments online. (HUDSON and BRENNAN, concurring.)
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Confrontation Clause