290 P.3d 174
Wyo.2012Background
- Hutchinson was convicted of one count of second‑degree sexual abuse of a minor; victim HAL was eight at trial and the step‑grandfather.
- Competency of HAL as a witness was challenged; a competency hearing was held outside the jury and the district court ruled she was competent.
- Hutchinson argued the competency hearing was improperly timed and the examination was insufficient.
- The State argued the court conducted a meaningful competency inquiry and HAL met the five‑part test for competency.
- The State presented witnesses and HAL’s testimony supported sexual contact; Hutchinson moved for judgment of acquittal, which the district court denied.
- The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, finding HAL competent and the State proved sexual contact beyond a reasonable doubt.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Competency of child witness | Hutchinson: HAL not properly examined; not competent | State: hearing meaningful; HAL meets five‑part test | Not clearly erroneous; HAL competent |
| Sufficiency of evidence for sexual contact | Hutchinson: insufficient evidence of sexual contact | State presented strong evidence | Evidence sufficient; denial of acquittal proper |
Key Cases Cited
- English v. State, 982 P.2d 139 (Wy. 1999) (competency of witnesses; trial court must examine child when competency is questioned)
- Gruwell v. State, 254 P.3d 231 (Wy. 2011) (deference to trial court on witness credibility and demeanor)
- Mersereau v. State, 286 P.3d 97 (Wy. 2012) (five‑part test and competency review for child witnesses)
- Larsen v. State, 686 P.2d 583 (Wy. 1984) (five‑part test for child witness competency; truthfulness emphasis)
- Woyak v. State, 226 P.3d 841 (Wy. 2010) (timing and thoroughness of competency hearing; taint considerations)