People v. Vaello
Opinion of the Court
The court properly exercised its discretion in permitting the People’s expert, a licensed nurse practitioner certified as a sexual assault nurse examiner, to testify about the relationship between the victim’s genital injury and forcible sexual intercourse. Given the witness’s broad experience and training, she was qualified to testify about the physiological processes of a woman’s body during sexual activity, and, concomitantly, about how the victim’s injury might have occurred in light of those physiological processes (see People v Welch, 71 AD3d 1329, 1331 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 811 [2010]). The witness did not express a direct opinion on the ultimate issue of whether the sexual conduct was forcible or consensual.
The court properly denied, without granting a hearing, defendants’ CPL 330.30 (2) motion to set aside the verdict on the
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Tom, J.E, Friedman, DeGrasse, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.