Expert Testimony as to Truth and Veracity of a Witness is Admissible

State v. Prows, 2011 UT App 9 (Utah Court of Appeals, January 13, 2011).

Prows was convicted of aggravated sexual abuse of a child.  Defendant appeals argues the confession should have been suppressed , and that Defendant should have been permitted to present expert testimony regarding how his mental state would have affected his confession.

When evaluating the constitutionality of an interrogation the Court must analyze the representations made by the interrogators and the characteristics of the subject.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court finding that the questioning was not constitutionally coercive.  Police made no false promises, made no threats, or made any misrepresentations of the evidence.  The length of the interrogation was only 51 minutes.  Prows’s stated at the time of the interrogation that he “felt good.” He did not exhibit below-average cognitive abilities and he had taken his medications to control his depression and ADD. 

The Court found that expert testimony is admissible as to the truth and veracity of the witness so the trial court erred in not allowing this evidence.  However, because of all the other evidence against Defendant, this was harmless error.

Full Decision available at  http://www.utcourts.gov/opinions/appopin/prows011311.pdf