Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Evidence Impeachment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Appeals court hears challenge to evidentiary rulings in Wilfredo Lopez conviction
Summary
Appeal arguments centered on whether the trial court improperly allowed a mother to be called for impeachment, whether the prosecutor misstated the mother's testimony in closing, and whether other prior allegations about the alleged victim should have been admitted to challenge credibility.
The court heard argument in the appeal of Wilfredo Lopez, raising contested trial rulings about calling a witness and closing-argument characterization of that witness’s testimony. Defense counsel argued the Commonwealth improperly called the alleged victim’s mother principally to impeach her with a previously recorded statement to a DCF worker, invoking concerns under the Maldonado/Malafi impeachment doctrine. Counsel said the mother’s direct testimony did not corroborate the child’s account and that the prosecutor’s closing overstated the mother’s testimony.
Defense counsel also urged the court to consider prior, close-in-time allegations the alleged victim made to program staff and peers, arguing those incidents bore on credibility. The Commonwealth, represented by Tracy Cusick, responded that prosecutors had a good-faith basis to call the mother because a prior DCF report memorialized statements the mother attributed to the defendant and that the DCF worker was available to impeach if the mother’s trial testimony diverged.
Cusick told the panel the line of questioning and the DCF witness were appropriate, that any inartful phrasing in closing did not create a substantial risk of a miscarriage of justice, and that the judge instructed jurors about what closing argument is not. She also argued the excluded prior allegations were properly screened under the rape-shield and related evidentiary rules and that those incidents were not sufficiently similar to be admissible for impeachment.
The judges pressed both sides on whether the Commonwealth had acted in good faith in calling the mother, how the DCF worker’s testimony was used for impeachment, and whether the alleged victim’s subsequent inconsistent statements or social-media messages were probative. The case was submitted after argument.
