v. Daley
2021 COA 85
| Colo. Ct. App. | 2021Background:
- Victim (mother’s daughter) alleged years of sexual abuse by defendant Carri Lyn Daley: photographing the victim, mutual sexual contact, and arranging contacts with third parties (the “British Guy” and Nick Helton), including a threesome when the victim was 17.
- Prosecution introduced extensive text messages, photos, witness testimony, and Helton’s out-of-court statements; jury convicted Daley on multiple sexual-offense counts and acquitted on some counts related to a separate incident (“Daddy”).
- Mid-trial Daley was hospitalized after ingesting multiple pills and leaving a suicide note; the trial court found her voluntarily absent and proceeded in her absence.
- During rebuttal the prosecutor asked a detective whether the victim’s in-court testimony was generally consistent with prior recorded interviews; the jury did not hear the recordings—only the detective’s opinion of consistency.
- Daley raised multiple appellate claims (presence at trial, sleeping jurors, refusal of child-hearsay instruction, improper detective testimony, admission of unavailable witness statements, res gestae sexual-environment evidence, rape-shield exclusion, and cumulative error).
- The court held the detective’s consistency testimony was improper (opinion on truthfulness) but that error was harmless; all other claims were rejected and conviction affirmed.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Right to be present after hospitalization | People: Daley voluntarily absented herself; trial may proceed. | Daley: absence was not voluntary; proceeding violated constitutional right to be present. | Waiver: voluntary (suicide attempt + note); court did not abuse discretion in proceeding. |
| Alleged sleeping jurors / new trial | People: court monitored jurors and took remedial steps; no juror slept. | Daley: multiple jurors slept; verdict tainted. | No abuse of discretion—trial court’s observations and questioning supported denial of new trial. |
| Refusal to give statutory child-hearsay instruction | People: statements were not admitted under child-hearsay statute. | Daley: her stipulation and prosecution notice warranted the instruction. | No error—evidence was admitted as prior consistent statements, not under child-hearsay statute. |
| Detective testimony that victim’s trial testimony was consistent with prior statements | People: testimony showed consistency; rehabilitative purpose. | Daley: this amounted to an impermissible opinion on witness truthfulness and usurped the jury. | Error: detective’s opinion improperly vouched for witness truthfulness; but error was harmless. |
| Admission of Helton’s out-of-court statements (unavailable witness) | People: statements against interest admissible; Helton unavailable (died). | Daley: challenged trustworthiness/admission. | Admitted: court properly found statements against interest and corroborating circumstances. |
| Res gestae / sexual-environment evidence (sexual toys, explicit photos) | People: relevant to grooming, context, and corroboration; not unduly prejudicial. | Daley: evidence irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial. | Admissible: probative of grooming and corroboration; any prejudice was not substantial. |
| Rape-shield exclusion of testimony about victim’s prior sexual contact with a cousin | People: proffered testimony not shown relevant/material under rape-shield statute. | Daley: prosecution opened the door; cousin’s testimony would affect credibility. | Exclusion proper: offer of proof insufficient; statute bars such evidence absent required showing. |
| Cumulative error | People: only one error and it was harmless. | Daley: multiple errors collectively deprived her of a fair trial. | No cumulative error—only one harmless error identified. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Wittrein, 221 P.3d 1076 (Colo. 2009) (witnesses may not testify that another witness was telling the truth)
- People v. Price, 240 P.3d 557 (Colo. App. 2010) (voluntary absence by suicide attempt can constitute waiver of presence)
- Hanes v. People, 598 P.2d 131 (Colo. 1979) (trial court in superior position to observe juror attentiveness)
- Crosby v. United States, 506 U.S. 255 (U.S. 1993) (absence is voluntary if defendant knows proceedings are taking place and does not attend)
- Bartley v. People, 817 P.2d 1029 (Colo. 1991) (harmless-error standard where error must not have substantially influenced verdict)
- People v. Rollins, 892 P.2d 866 (Colo. 1995) (definition and limits of res gestae evidence)
- Dickerson v. Commonwealth, 174 S.W.3d 451 (Ky. 2005) (testimony that prior statements were consistent with trial testimony improperly bolsters credibility)
- Jennings v. State, 716 S.E.2d 91 (S.C. 2011) (forensic interviewer’s reports stating children were consistent viewed as testimonial vouching)