Document Type

Case Summary

Publication Date

1-1-2004

Case Synopsis

Real party in interest Robert Romano is charged in an indictment with four counts of sexual assault of a minor under fourteen years of age and ten counts of lewdness with a child under fourteen years of age. Romano and his girlfriend are the natural parents of the child victim, born May 5, 1997. In November 2002, the child allegedly told her mother that Romano had engaged in inappropriate activities with her. The mother contacted Nevada Child Protective Services and, at that agency’s request, took the child to Sunrise Hospital for evaluation. A pediatric emergency physician at Sunrise testified before the grand jury that the findings of the child’s examination were normal, meaning that there were no signs of trauma, but that this did not necessarily preclude the possibility of sexual assault. On December 19, 2002, the five-year-old child testified before the grand jury that she knew people were not supposed to touch certain areas of her body. She testified that she had touched Romano’s penis with her hands. She also demonstrated how she touched him. The child further testified that Romano had touched her butt with his hands and mouth while they were both naked and that he told her not to tell anyone. The child’s mother was not present in the courtroom when the child testified. Romano did not testify before the grand jury. Instead, he requested that the prosecutor tell the grand jury that the mother had fabricated these charges and used the child either for financial gain or to get revenge on Romano. On January 10, 2003, the grand jury returned an indictment charging Romano with sexual assault and lewdness with a child under fourteen years of age. Subsequently, Romano moved for an independent psychological examination of the victim, alleging that there was no corroborating evidence other than the victim’s testimony and that a reasonable basis existed for believing the victim’s mental or emotional state may have affected her veracity. The district court granted Romano’s motion. Thereafter, the State petitioned the Nevada Supreme Court for a writ of prohibition or, alternatively, for a writ of mandamus.

Download

Share

COinS