Montana Supreme Court Reverses Strommen Conviction

The Montana Supreme Court reversed the conviction of former Valley County Sheriff’s Deputy Luke Strommen on April 30. Due to the 4-2 decision by the Supreme Court, Strommen’s case is now remanded for a new trial.

In December of 2018, Strommen was charged with sexual intercourse without consent. He was found guilty after the July 2020 jury determined he had initiated a non-consensual sexual relationship with the victim when she was 14 years old and the actions continued for years while Strommen was working as a Valley County Sheriff’s Deputy.

In December 2020, Judge John Larson sentenced Strommen to 40 years in the Montana State Prison and wouldn’t be eligible for parole for 10 years. Strommen’s attorneys have been appealing this conviction, and appealed to the Montana Supreme Court in February 2021.

During Strommen’s initial trial in Glasgow, the State sought to present the testimony of a sexual assault behavioral psychologist Dr. Sheri Vanino remotely via two-way video conferencing due to her unavailability to travel to Montana for the trial. At a pretrial hearing on June 24, 2020, the State told the District Court Dr. Vanino had a conflict and emphasized part of the basis for her video testimony request was because she lived in Denver and “it’s significant travel for her to get to Glasgow, Montana.” Though the trial was later in 2020, there was no COVID-19 related concerns present or suggested regarding the video testimony. Though the defense objected, asserting that personal in-court cross-examination was essential, the District Court granted the State’s motion allowing the remote testimony.

The Court documents from the April 30 Montana Supreme Court case stated Dr. Vanino’s opinions were the key to the State’s case as she testified opinions about delayed reporting, when and why it occurs, to whom the disclosure is made and the supposed difficulty in detailing alleged abuse.

The appeal to the Montana Supreme court argued that the District Court erroneously allowed the State to present adverse expert testimony remotely via two-way video conferencing at trial. The Supreme Court agreed with Strommen, holding that the allowance of Dr. Vanino’s remote testimony violated Strommen’s fundamental right to personal face-to-face confrontation of adverse prosecution witnesses in the courtroom at trial, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment and Mont. Const. art. II, § 24.

The Montana Supreme Court also stated the State failed to satisfy its burden of showing Doctor Vanino was unavailable to testify in person. As a result, this fact was enough to reverse Strommen’s conviction and order a new trial.