S-23-0898 State of Nebraska (Appellee) v. Carlos Corral (Appellant)
Appeal from the District Court for Douglas County, Judge Katie L. Benson
Attorneys: Michael J. Wilson (Berry Law Firm for Appellant) and P. Christian Adamski (Asst. Attorney General for Appellee)
Criminal: First-degree sexual assault of a child and intentional child abuse
Proceedings below: A jury found Appellant guilty of three (3) counts of first-degree sexual assault of a child and one count of intentional child abuse, and the district court sentenced him to aggregate prison term of twenty-five (25) to thirty (30) years. Appellee petitioned to bypass the Court of Appeals, which the Supreme Court granted and transferred this case from the docket of the Court of Appeals to its docket.
Issues: Appellant makes the following assignments of error: 1) Trial counsel provided prejudicial ineffective assistance when she failed to object to joinder and move to sever the sexual assault counts from the child abuse count because, in separate trials, evidence of the first-degree sexual assaults on M.R. would not have been admissible in a trial on the child abuse of E.R. and vice versa; 2) Trial counsel provided prejudicial ineffective assistance when she failed to request limiting instructions prohibiting the jury from considering the evidence of the alleged sexual assaults when weighing the alleged child abuse and vice versa; 3) Trial counsel provided prejudicial ineffective assistance when she failed to object to hearsay testimony by A.R. as to statements allegedly made by M.R. and E.R. when disclosing the abuse to her; 4) Trial counsel provided prejudicial ineffective assistance when she failed to object to hearsay and double hearsay testimony by Lieutenant Jon Downey as to statements allegedly made by A.R., M.R., and E.R., when they reported the alleged sexual assaults to him; 5) Trial counsel provided prejudicial ineffective assistance when she failed to object to hearsay and double hearsay testimony by forensic interviewer Sarah Scheinost as to disclosures of alleged abuse by M.R. and E.R. during their forensic interviews; 6) Trial counsel provided prejudicial ineffective assistance when she failed to object to hearsay testimony by Detective Nicole Walker that E.R. allegedly “disclosed physical abuse” during her forensic interview; 7) Trial counsel provided prejudicial ineffective assistance when she failed to object on both foundational and hearsay grounds as to double hearsay testimony by Detective Nicole Walker that “people” working at M & A Enterprises and KB Building Services provided “confirmation that [A.R.] worked there during those relevant periods of time[,]” and that the information Walker received was “consistent with the hours that were reported to [Walker] by [A.R.];” 8) The trial court erred when it overruled Appellant’s objection to Detective Nicole Walker’s testimony regarding her experience that “a delay of years in . . . disclosure” of sexual abuse “is very common[,]” and that, in her experience, delayed disclosure occurs in “at least 75 percent of my cases;” 9) Trial counsel provided prejudicial ineffective assistance when she failed to impeach M.R. with her deposition testimony that she saw “white stuff” came out of his penis during sexual assaults; and 10) The cumulative prejudicial effect of the above ineffective assistance of trial counsel and erroneous evidentiary ruling by the trial court requires a new trial.