P. v. Despois
Defendant Jeremy R. Despois appeals from his conviction of two counts of committing a lewd act on a child. He maintains the trial court erred in excluding the testimony of a psychiatrist who would testify as an expert witness regarding questioning techniques and suggestibility of a child witness, and that it was error to deny his motion for new trial on the basis his counsel was ineffective. We conclude there was no error, and affirm.
Comments on P. v. Despois