Trinidad C. v. Augustin L., 92 N.E.3d 475

Petitioner Trinidad C. sought a plenary order of protection on behalf of herself and her three minor children after her then five‑year‑old stepdaughter L.C. disclosed sexual touching by respondent Augustin L.
L.C. told her mother the morning after the alleged incident that Augustin touched her vaginal area; her teacher reported behavior changes and increased sexualized knowledge; DCFS interviewed mother, teacher, and L.C. the same day.
A recorded victim‑sensitive forensic interview (VSI) a week later repeated that Augustin rubbed L.C.’s vaginal area with his hand over her clothes; L.C. stated she was afraid to tell because Augustin threatened to leave the home.
At the protection hearing the trial court held a hearing on admissibility under 735 ILCS 5/8‑2601, found L.C. unavailable to testify, and admitted her out‑of‑court statements as reliable and corroborated (redness observed, behavioral changes, and consistent statements).
The trial court issued a one‑year plenary order of protection; Augustin appealed solely challenging admission of L.C.’s hearsay statements.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether L.C. was "unavailable" to testify under 8‑2601	L.C.’s age, fear, observed demeanor, and behavior changes establish unavailability	Johnson requires willingness to testify; L.C. was not proven unavailable	Court: Unavailability may include young children fearful to testify (Stechly); trial court did not abuse discretion finding L.C. unavailable
Whether L.C.’s out‑of‑court statements were reliable	Statements were immediate, consistent, detailed, used age‑appropriate terms, and VSI showed fear and consistency	Inconsistencies in peripheral details undermine reliability	Court: Totality (time, content, circumstances) supports reliability; trial court did not abuse discretion
Whether there was sufficient corroboration for admission without child testifying	Corroboration exists: observed vaginal redness, teacher/mother testimony about behavior changes and sexualized knowledge, and consistent statements	Redness alone is insufficient without medical testimony; aggregate evidence still weak	Court: Corroboration may be physical or circumstantial; combined evidence sufficiently corroborated the hearsay statements
Whether admission of L.C.’s statements required reversal of the order of protection	Admission was proper; thus the order was supported by admitted evidence	Admission improper; order must be vacated	Court: Admission proper under 8‑2601; order of protection affirmed

People v. Stechly, 225 Ill. 2d 246 (Ill. 2007) (unavailability under child‑sexual‑abuse hearsay exception may include fear and youth; reliability factors)
People v. Johnson, 118 Ill. 2d 501 (Ill. 1987) (reluctance to testify under Rule 414 does not necessarily establish unavailability)
In re Marriage of Flannery, 328 Ill. App. 3d 602 (Ill. App. Ct.) (civil 8‑2601 is the counterpart to criminal child‑hearsay exception)
In re A.P., 179 Ill. 2d 184 (Ill. 1997) (corroboration defined as independent evidence making abuse more probable)
In re Brandon P., 2014 IL 116653 (Ill. 2014) (determination of a child’s unavailability is fact‑specific and reviewed for abuse of discretion)