State v. George

2002

Court: WI Supreme Court

Facts: Child testifies about abuse, but recants.

Posture: Guilty at trial, post-conviction motion set denied. Affirmed at appeal.

Issue: Should the evidence excluded under the rape-shield law have been allowed? Also should the doctor's testimony have been allowed? Were these exclusions unconstitutional?

Holding: Rape-shield stuff was properly excluded, doctor stuff was not. Reversed and remanded for new trial.

Rule: Complex discussions of rules of evidence

Reasoning: On the rape shield stuff, the evidence that was proffered was actually pretty banal, and doesn't overcome the interest of protecting the witness. For the doctor stuff, though, it was a big deal, especially since the state's experts went unchallenged.

Dicta: