Velasquez-Lazo was charged with second-degree criminal conduct when the victim was under 13 and he was more than 36 months older than the victim. He challenged his conviction and defense wanted to admit testimony from the V’s aunt, who reported that she overheard a conversation between V and her sister where they were talking about “feeling bad that they had to fabricate claims against the defendant in order to get immigration benefits.” The district court allowed defense to call the aunt to testify about this conversation and to cross-examine V about this conversation as well, finding that it went to the V’s motive to lie. (2) The defense also wanted to introduce a pamphlet about the UVISA program, but was not allowed to do so due to lack of foundation. (3) The defense also wanted to call V’s mother and introduce evidence of her (mom’s) immigration status in order to bolster their argument that the 13 year old victim fabricated the abuse allegation. The court said No. Defense was only allowed to ask the mom if she ever told V to lie. The reasoning was that mom’s immigration status had the potential to confuse the jury and was of limited relevance. HELD: Court of Appeals affirmed. The court of appeals affirmed (Feb 1, 2021).
National Immigrant Women's Advocacy Project