In People v. Stuckey , Anderson Stuckey was accused of having sexual intercourse with his young daughter over the course of two years.
When the child finally disclosed to a teacher what her father had supposedly been doing, Stuckey objected to the use of his daughter's statements as "hearsay" -- utterances lacking appropriate evidentiary value (and thus unusable in a court of law).
When he was convicted of "sexual conduct against a child in the first degree, criminal contempt in the first degree (five counts), criminal contempt in the second degree (two counts)" and sentenced to a 16-year term, he appealed.
The Appellate Division, First Department, found the child's statements qualified under the "prompt outcry" exception to the hearsay rule.
"An outcry of rape is prompt if made at the first suitable opportunity and is a relative concept dependent on the facts." Given the victim's young age, and fear of revealing her father's misconduct, the AD1 concluded the minor's statements -- made some three days after the last attack -- fell within the law's exception.
No outcry there.
To download a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: People v. Stuckey