Tennessee appeals court hears challenge to admission of child’s forensic interview in Cunningham case

Summary

At oral argument, defense counsel argued the trial court erred by admitting a videotaped forensic interview without the child testifying under oath that it was true; the state said the victim’s live testimony and medical evidence undercut any claimed error. The panel took the case under advisement.

A Tennessee appellate panel heard oral argument in State of Tennessee v. John David Cunningham on whether a videotaped forensic interview of the alleged child victim was admissible at trial and whether any error requires reversal under plain-error review.

Appellate counsel McNally urged the court to reverse, saying the controlling statute requires that, for admission, “the child must testify under oath that it is true and correct,” and that did not occur. McNally said trial counsel failed to preserve the issue with contemporaneous objections or a motion for new trial, leaving the appellate court to consider plain error. He repeatedly cited the court’s recent decision in Stegall and the Supreme Court’s McCoy precedent as requiring strict compliance with the statute’s authentication requirement.

The argument centered on three disputed points: whether the statute (cited in argument as TCA 27-24-7-123)…

Tennessee appeals court hears challenge to admission of child’s forensic interview in Cunningham case

Summary

Subscribe to keep reading