## Facts

- Brad Skinner was charged with aggravated assault and battery after a domestic altercation in which his wife alleged he held a knife to her throat and threatened to kill her.
- A 911 operator overheard the threat during an emergency call.
- When arrested, police found a knife in Skinner’s pocket.
- At trial, the wife testified about the charged incident, an additional assault after Skinner’s arrest, and threats that she “better not testify” about his knife use.
- The State presented expert testimony describing domestic violence dynamics and battered woman syndrome concepts (e.g., cycle of violence, escalation, controlling behavior) in general terms, without offering an opinion about Skinner’s specific traits or guilt.
- A juror with a hearing aid served on the jury.
- During trial, a juror had improper contact with defense counsel and relayed observations; the court held a hearing and kept the juror.
- Skinner had multiple prior felonies and, after conviction, received a life sentence under the habitual criminal statute.

## Issues

1. Whether a hearing-impaired juror’s participation prejudiced Skinner by missing material portions of the trial.
2. Whether juror misconduct (improper contact and alleged independent investigation) required juror removal or a new trial.
3. Whether the expert’s battered woman syndrome/domestic violence testimony was inadmissible character or “profile” evidence against Skinner.
4. Whether Skinner’s absence from the juror-misconduct hearing violated his right to be present at a critical stage.
5. Whether the State impermissibly coerced the victim’s testimony, violating due process.
6. Whether excluding evidence of the victim’s methamphetamine use and withdrawal was an abuse of discretion denying a fair trial.

## Decision

- The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and life sentence.
- The court found no showing that the hearing-impaired juror missed material testimony or that any hearing limitation affected the verdict.
- The court held the trial court did not abuse its discretion by retaining the juror after the misconduct allegation because Skinner failed to show a reasonable possibility the conduct affected the verdict or introduced prejudicial extraneous information.
- The court ruled the expert testimony was admissible as general explanatory evidence about domestic violence and did not constitute impermissible character evidence because it did not address Skinner’s specific traits or opine on guilt.
- The court held Skinner’s absence from the juror-misconduct hearing was not reversible error because counsel was present and Skinner did not demonstrate prejudice or that fairness was thwarted.
- The court rejected the due process claim of witness coercion, concluding the record did not establish impermissible governmental interference and the defense could cross-examine the victim about credibility pressures.
- The court upheld exclusion of methamphetamine use/withdrawal evidence as a discretionary evidentiary ruling that did not cause prejudice warranting reversal.

## Legal Principles

- A conviction will not be reversed for alleged juror disability or misconduct absent a showing of actual prejudice, including a reasonable possibility that the challenged circumstance affected the verdict.
- Trial courts have discretion to investigate alleged juror misconduct and to decide whether removal is necessary; appellate review focuses on abuse of discretion and prejudice.
- Expert testimony on domestic violence and battered woman syndrome may be admitted in general terms to explain victim behavior and context; it is improper if used as character or profile evidence to prove the defendant acted in conformity with a described batterer profile.
- A defendant’s right to be present applies to proceedings where presence bears a reasonably substantial relation to the defense; absence is not reversible without a showing of prejudice.
- Due process is violated by governmental intimidation of witnesses only when it substantially interferes with a witness’s free choice to testify and undermines trial fairness.
- Evidentiary rulings excluding drug-use evidence are reviewed for abuse of discretion; reversal requires a showing that exclusion affected substantial rights and trial fairness.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed Skinner’s aggravated assault conviction and habitual criminal life sentence, holding that alleged juror hearing limitations and misconduct, admission of general domestic-violence expert testimony, Skinner’s absence from a juror-misconduct hearing, claims of witness coercion, and exclusion of methamphetamine-related evidence did not result in prejudice or reversible error.


Skinner v. State, 33 P.3d 758 (Wyo. 2001)