History
  • No items yet
midpage
Anderson v. Com.
282 Va. 457
| Va. | 2011
Read the full case

Background

  • Victim, a 41-year-old woman, was assaulted by Anderson on May 1, 2009 in Pittsylvania County.
  • Trial was a bench trial in circuit court; defendant testified and raised credibility issues via impeachment.
  • Defense sought to impeach victim with a prior inconsistent statement about seeing a gun.
  • Commonwealth sought to rehabilitate the victim through prior consistent statements to Dr. Curtis and Officer Klauss.
  • Evidence showed victim reported the assault quickly to a counselor and police, and the defendant later admitted to oral sex.
  • Circuit court admitted the prior consistent statements over objection; appellate court affirmed denial of appeal.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether prior consistent statements were admissible to rehabilitate credibility after impeachment Second exception to exclusion applies; statements are non-hearsay for credibility Statements were overly detailed; risk of impermissible repetition Admissible under the second exception; harmless error overall
Whether admission of the statements affected the trial's fairness Independent corroboration supports credibility; error minimal Restatement of victim's account too extensive Harmless error; conviction affirmed

Key Cases Cited

  • Scott v. Moon, 143 Va. 425 (1925) (repetition does not render testimony more trustworthy)
  • Faison v. Hudson, 243 Va. 397 (1992) (prior consistent statements may rehabilitate credibility after impeachment)
  • Ruhlin v. Samaan, 282 Va. 371 (2011) (second exception to rehabilitation; motive to falsify must be precedent to admissibility)
  • Clere v. Commonwealth, 212 Va. 472 (1971) (prior consistent statements may be admitted to reflect credibility; not for truth)
  • Creasy v. Commonwealth, 9 Va.App. 470 (1990) (shows immateriality of who introduced the statements; admissibility same)
  • Rose v. Commonwealth, 270 Va. 3 (2005) (harmless-error standard for non-constitutional error)
  • Clay v. Commonwealth, 262 Va. 253 (2001) (non-constitutional error is harmless if record shows fair trial and no substantial influence)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Anderson v. Com.
Court Name: Supreme Court of Virginia
Date Published: Nov 4, 2011
Citation: 282 Va. 457
Docket Number: 110069
Court Abbreviation: Va.