State v. Rohrich

In State v. Rohrich (Wash. 1997) 939 P.2d 697, the prosecution "called the child victim to the stand as its first witness and asked her several questions including what school she went to, what she got for her birthday, and what her cat's name was. The victim was not asked about and did not testify about any alleged abuse. Defense counsel did not cross-examine her." (Id. at p. 699.) The Washington Supreme Court held that, for purposes of the confrontation clause and a state law permitting use of hearsay statements from a child sexual abuse victim, the requirement that the victim "testifies at the proceedings" is not satisfied if the prosecution does not elicit testimony about the subject of the hearsay statements, to wit, the alleged sexual abuse and, therefore, the defense is not afforded an opportunity to cross-examine the victim about the alleged sexual abuse. (Id. at pp. 699-703.)