# State v. Liddell

> Montana Supreme Court · July 10, 1984 · 211 Mont. 180

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9507828

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JAMES P. LIDDELL, JR., Defendant and Appellant
- **Court:** Montana Supreme Court
- **Decided:** July 10, 1984
- **Citations:** 211 Mont. 180; 685 P.2d 918; 42 A.L.R. 4th 865; 1984 Mont. LEXIS 973
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Morrison
- **Judges:** Haswell, Sheehy, Morrison, Shea, Harrison, Weber, Gulbrandson
- **Cited by:** 53 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9507828

## Opinion text

MR. JUSTICE MORRISON,
respectfully dissenting:
Expert testimony regarding “post rape syndrome” is troublesome. Such testimony seems to be a comment on the credibility of another witness. If it is to be allowed then full opportunity must be accorded the defendant to rebut the testimony. This would necessarily involve permitting a doctor or other qualified person to examine the alleged victim and provide the same opportunity for testimony as is given to the prosecution.
Therefore, I would hold that it was error to deny the defendant an opportunity for an expert examination of the alleged victim, with an opportunity to rebut the testimony offered by the prosecution.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9507828. Public record. Not legal advice.