State of Minnesota v. Ruben Perez-Robles

Minneapolis, Minnesota criminal sexual conduct criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant.

Ruben Perez-Robles sexually abused Z.F.R., one of his first cousins, beginning when Z.F.R. was between the ages of six to eight years old. The abuse continued over approximately the next 20 years. Perez-Robles is eight years older than Z.F.R.



Perez-Robles's and Z.F.R.'s families spent time together when Z.F.R. was growing up. Perez-Robles's family also lived with Z.F.R.'s family for several months when she was young. Z.F.R. testified at trial that it was during this time that Perez-Robles first assaulted her. She testified that, when the two of them were taking out the garbage, Perez-Robles cornered her by the trash can and put his hands down her pants. She also testified about a number of additional assaults by Perez-Robles, including when he first raped her when she was 12.



Z.F.R. did not tell anyone about the sexual abuse for a number of years. She eventually disclosed the abuse to her boyfriend when she was in her early 20s, and to her mom after going to therapy. Z.F.R. reported the abuse to law enforcement in 2020. The investigating officer allowed Z.F.R. to choose whether she wanted to be interviewed by a police officer or a forensic interviewer at CornerHouse. Z.F.R. opted to be interviewed at CornerHouse. During the interview, Z.F.R. shared a letter documenting her abuse, which she had written in 2018 to process her trauma.



Respondent State of Minnesota subsequently charged Perez-Robles with first-degree criminal sexual conduct in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.342, subd. 1(h)(iii) (Supp. 1995) (victim under age 16, significant relationship, multiple acts over an extended period of time), and third-degree criminal sexual conduct in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.344, subd. 1(c) (2008) (sexual penetration using force or coercion).



Before trial, the state provided notice that it intended to present, as an expert witness, the forensic interviewer from CornerHouse who had conducted Z.F.R.'s interview. The state also moved to admit the entirety of the CornerHouse video documenting the interview, which was over two hours long, the body-worn camera video of Z.F.R.'s statement to law enforcement, and Z.F.R.'s 2018 letter. Perez-Robles filed a motion in limine to exclude this evidence. The district court determined that the forensic interviewer could offer expert testimony on delayed reporting and other counterintuitive behaviors of sexual-assault victims and could testify about statements made by Z.F.R. during the interview as prior consistent statements. But the district court excluded the video of Z.F.R.'s CornerHouse interview as cumulative and allowed only a nine-minute edited version of body-worn camera video of her statement to police and a heavily redacted version of her 2018 letter. The district court also advised the state to limit the forensic interviewer's testimony concerning statements made by Z.F.R. to the "highlights."



This case was tried to a jury in March 2023. Z.F.R. explained during her testimony that she delayed reporting the sexual abuse because she thought her family must have known about it and would not do anything if she disclosed it to them; she did not want to exacerbate any of her family members' health issues; she was in denial and did not want to admit the abuse happened; and she thought the abuse was her fault. The forensic interviewer testified about several of the incidents of sexual assault reported by Z.F.R. during the interview and provided an explanation of delayed reporting in sexual-abuse cases and the types of conduct associated with "grooming."