State v. Matos

Amicus brief arguing that the Court should provide proper guidelines for the use of fresh complaint testimony in sexual assault cases.

The fresh complaint doctrine helps jurors review evidence accurately and unbiasedly during a sexual assault criminal trial by addressing jurors’ tendency to draw a false stereotype about the truthfulness of a sexual assault report if the victim did not immediately report the offense. Fresh complaint testimony is important for preventing jurors from unfairly discrediting the victim, but its purpose is limited and it can conflict with evidence rules that could harm a defendant’s right to a fair trial. In this amicus brief, the ACLU-NJ argues that the Court should clarify the appropriate scope and use of fresh complaint testimony in court, and that the Court should provide guidelines for proper jury instruction for how to review fresh complaint testimony to account for the rights and interest of both victims and defendants. Specifically, the brief suggests that the Court both recognize the falsity of this stereotypical view of sexual assault victims and to instruct trial courts to inform jurors of this falsity.