In this child sex assault prosecution, the Commonwealth called as a witness a forensic interviewer who testified about her interview of the minor victim. Over defense objections, she opined as to the importance of sensory detail for children generally, though she was not offered as an expert. The Superior Court found admission of this evidence was not an abuse of discretion. Under Pa.R.E. 701, the Court found this to be appropriate lay testimony and affirmed the judgments of sentence.
