State v. Mederos, 312 P.3d 438

Two seven-year-old girls (A.S. and A.R.) accused Lloyd Mederos, who lived with one child, of sexual assault; allegations came to light after A.S. told her mother she had been "sexing" her friend and that Mederos had touched A.R.
Forensic interviews and medical exams produced vague, sometimes inconsistent statements from the children and inconclusive medical findings.
At trial both children gave disjointed testimony with frequent lapses of memory; the State presented testimony from family members, forensic interviewers, a social worker, and a pediatrician, and admitted forensic interview videos, drawings, and medical reports (all by stipulation).
A jury convicted Mederos of two counts of sexual assault; he received concurrent 100-year sentences with portions suspended, and appealed claiming ineffective assistance of counsel.
Mederos’ appellate claim: trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to numerous hearsay statements and for stipulating to admission of evidence containing hearsay, which he says cumulatively prejudiced the outcome.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to witnesses’ testimony repeating children’s out‑of‑court statements	State: testimony and exhibits were admissible or harmless/cumulative; counsel used them to impeach children	Mederos: many witnesses repeated inadmissible hearsay and counsel should have objected; stipulations admitted hearsay exhibits	Counsel not ineffective on direct appeal — many statements qualified as prior inconsistent/consistent statements or were cumulative; counsel may have had reasonable tactical reasons; record insufficient to show deficient performance or prejudice
Whether counsel erred by stipulating to admission of forensic interviews, drawings, and medical reports	State: stipulations admitted material already available and useful to test credibility	Mederos: stipulations admitted hearsay that bolstered prosecution and prejudiced outcome	Stipulations were reasonable trial strategy given inconsistencies; admitted items provided cross‑examination fodder and were cumulative; no shown prejudice

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (Ineffective assistance test: deficient performance and prejudice)
Riggs v. State, 362 Mont. 140 (trial counsel’s tactical choice not to object to victims’ prior statements can be reasonable)
Howard v. State, 362 Mont. 196 (prior inconsistent statements and hearsay rules in child abuse cases)
Whitlow v. State, 343 Mont. 90 (strong presumption counsel’s conduct falls within reasonable professional assistance)
Van Kirk v. State, 306 Mont. 215 (cumulative admissible evidence makes admission of similar tainted evidence harmless)
State v. Lawrence, 285 Mont. 140 (lapse of memory qualifies as a prior inconsistent statement)