This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Saldana (D) was convicted of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree. He had used the defense of consent. He appealed, claiming that the trial court erred when it allowed the testimony of a sexual assault victim counselor into evidence. The state (P) had used this counselor (who had treated the victim for ten weeks) as an expert. The doctor had testified about typical post-rape symptoms, behavior of rape victims, gave her opinion that the complainant was a rape victim, and stated that she believed the complainant; that she had not made up her story.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.