Hoglund v. State
2011 Ind. App. LEXIS 224
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Hoglund was convicted of one count of Class A felony child molesting for offenses against A.H. between 2002 and 2005.
- A.H. testified Hoglund repeatedly caused her to perform oral sex, using threats and bribery to coerce compliance.
- Experts Dr. Butler, Shestak, and Mayle testified about A.H.'s credibility; a key exchange involved Dr. Butler's opinion being stricken.
- The State introduced testimony under Lawrence-based credibility concepts; Steward/CSAAS distinctions were discussed.
- Hoglund received a 50-year sentence; the court found aggravating factors (age under 12, position of trust) and a mitigating factor (no prior convictions) and upheld the sentence on appeal.
- Hoglund argues the trial court abused its discretion admitting the fabrication testimony and that the sentence is inappropriate; the appellate court affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of evidence on fabrication | Hoglund | Hoglund | No abuse; indirect vouching allowed under Lawrence; Steward intact |
| Sentencing - aggravating factors proved | Hoglund | Hoglund | Age of victim established by conduct; admission implied; no error in aggravation |
| Sentence proportionality | Hoglund | Hoglund | Fifty years not inappropriate given the offense’s nature and Hoglund’s conduct |
Key Cases Cited
- Curley v. State, 777 N.E.2d 58 (Ind.Ct.App.2002) (admissibility of child-credibility evidence; abuse-of-discretion standard)
- Lawrence v. State, 464 N.E.2d 923 (Ind.1984) (allowing expert/contemporary witnesses to attest to credibility of a child witness; limits on vouching)
- Carter v. State, 754 N.E.2d 877 (Ind.2001) (distinction between indirect and direct vouching; autistic child testimony)
- Steward v. State, 652 N.E.2d 490 (Ind.1995) (rejection of CSAAS as proof of abuse; limits on such testimony)
- Stout v. State, 612 N.E.2d 1076 (Ind.Ct.App.1993) (behavioral evidence admissible in some contexts; later limited by Steward)
- Stewart v. State, 555 N.E.2d 121 (Ind.1990) (psychologist/therapist opinion on victim credibility; limits on vouching)