Prosecutor Error Means New Trial for Mills Man Accused of Molesting Four Year Old Twins

The Wyoming Supreme Court has come to a decision regarding a Mills man who is accused of sexually assaulting two four-year-old girls.

Because the prosecutor "impermissibly commented at trial" about the defendant's silence—a constitutional right—his conviction has been remanded and the district court ordered to a set a new trial.

Around 4 a.m. on September 15, 2019, a mother dropped off her four-year old twin daughters at her sister's home in Mills, Wyoming.

Her sister was not home, but her live-in boyfriend, William Frederick Patterson, allegedly watched the twins while their mother went to work.

When she picked them up that afternoon the twins told their mother about the sexual assault. We have intentionally left out specifics due to the graphic and sensitive nature of the allegations.

The next day the twins were taken to the Children's Advocacy Project (CAP) center and forensically interviewed by a detective.

Court records show that despite the detective's recommendation, the Natrona County District Attorney decided not to charge Mr. Patterson in 2019.

Three years later the mother contacted the same detective because the twins continued to bring up and remember more details about the abuse.

Patterson was charged with four counts—two counts of second and two counts of third degree sexual abuse of a minor.

The prosecutor, in her opening statement to the jury mentioned that the CAP center interviewed the victims and the detective interviewed someone who lived with Patterson. She added:

"I will let you know a request to Mr. Patterson to discuss things was made. He declined, which is his right to do so."

Patterson objected and moved for a mistrial. The court sustained that objection and instructed the jury to disregard the statement, but denied Patterson's motion for mistrial.

Ultimately the jury found Patterson guilty of two charges and the judge later sentenced him to 14–20 years in prison.

Patterson appealed. He argues that the prosecutor's error was prejudicial and entitled him to a new trial.

"We agree with Mr. Patterson that the prosecutor’s statement was an improper comment on his exercise of his constitutional right to remain silent. Under the Wyoming Constitution, such error is prejudicial per se and requires reversal of his conviction" ruled the Supreme Court.

The constitutional right to silence exists at all times—before arrest, at arrest, and after arrest; before a Miranda warning and after it. The right is self-executing.

Prosecutors using a citizen's right to silence to infer guilt is constitutionally prohibited, and in this case reverses the judgement and sentencing.

A new trial will be set.