## Facts

- Faustino Transfiguracion was tried and convicted in Hawaiʻi circuit court of multiple counts of sexually abusing minors, based on allegations from five complaining witnesses.
- Each complainant testified that Transfiguracion touched them inappropriately when they were young children.
- In each incident, Transfiguracion had a preexisting relationship with the child, and the alleged abuse occurred in locations tied to familiarity and access, including Transfiguracion’s home, the child’s home, and Transfiguracion’s vehicle.
- The State presented testimony from Dr. Alex Bivens, a psychologist who testified as a child sexual abuse witness.
- Dr. Bivens did not interview the complainants, did not review case materials, did not discuss the specific facts of the charged incidents, and did not offer an opinion on whether abuse occurred or whether Transfiguracion committed the offenses.
- Dr. Bivens offered general testimony on topics including delayed disclosure, offender “grooming” behaviors used to build trust with children, and statistical research about reported patterns involving child sexual abuse victims and offenders.
- His general research testimony included points that offenders often have a trusting relationship with a child before abuse and that offenders may have multiple victims.
- Transfiguracion objected that the testimony improperly bolstered the complainants’ credibility and invited the jury to convict because he fit a statistical “profile” of a child molester; the trial court overruled the objection and admitted the testimony.
- Transfiguracion also challenged the admission of certain other-acts evidence at trial as improper character/propensity evidence and as unfairly prejudicial.
- The Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) affirmed the convictions. Transfiguracion then sought review in the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by admitting Dr. Bivens’s generalized testimony on child sexual abuse dynamics and statistical research when Transfiguracion claimed it functioned as improper credibility bolstering and offender profiling.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion under Hawaiʻi Rules of Evidence 403 and 404 by admitting challenged prior bad act evidence.

## Decision

- The ICA affirmed the judgment of conviction, holding that admission of Dr. Bivens’s generalized child sexual abuse testimony was not erroneous and was permissible under Hawaiʻi evidence law when presented without case-specific opinions or credibility determinations.
- The ICA also upheld the trial court’s ruling admitting the challenged other-acts evidence, concluding the court did not abuse its discretion under HRE 403 and 404.
- The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court, in an order cited as **State v. Transfiguracion, No. SCWC-11-0000048, 2013 WL 1285112 (Haw. Mar. 28, 2013)**, denied certiorari, leaving the ICA’s affirmance in place.

## Legal Principles

- General testimony about child sexual abuse dynamics (such as delayed disclosure and grooming) can be admissible to help jurors evaluate behaviors that may seem inconsistent with abuse, so long as the testimony is relevant and satisfies HRE 702.
- A child sexual abuse witness’s testimony is less likely to be treated as improper vouching when the witness does not evaluate the complainants, does not discuss case facts, and does not opine on the truthfulness of specific witnesses or on the defendant’s guilt.
- Testimony describing research or statistical patterns may be allowed when offered as general information rather than as an assertion that the defendant matches a “profile” and therefore committed the charged acts.
- Admission of other-acts evidence is governed by HRE 404’s limits on propensity reasoning and by HRE 403’s balancing of probative value against unfair prejudice; appellate review is for abuse of discretion.
- A denial of certiorari is a discretionary refusal to review and leaves the lower court’s judgment intact without a merits opinion from the higher court.

## Conclusion

The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court’s 2013 Westlaw-cited disposition is an order denying certiorari, which left standing the ICA’s affirmance of Transfiguracion’s convictions, including the trial court’s admission of Dr. Bivens’s general testimony on child sexual abuse dynamics and the challenged other-acts evidence under HRE 403 and 404.


State v. Transfiguracion, 2013 WL 1285112 (2013)