State v. Horton, 200 N.C. App. 74 (Sept. 15, 2009)

Prejudicial error occurred warranting a new trial when the trial court overruled an objection to testimony of a witness who was qualified as an expert in the treatment of sexually abused children. After recounting a detailed description of an alleged sexual assault provided to her by the victim, the State asked the witness: “As far as treatment for victims . . . why would that detail be significant?” The witness responded: “[W]hen children provide those types of specific details it enhances their credibility.” The witness’s statement was an impermissible opinion regarding credibility. Additionally, it was error to allow the witness to testify that the child “had more likely than not been sexually abused,” where there was no physical evidence of abuse; such a statement exceeded permissible opinion testimony that a child has characteristics consistent with abused children.