LISBON — A Wellsville man sentenced in September 2023 to life in prison for raping a young boy over a six-year period recently lost his appeal, meaning his conviction stands.

Spencer Kidder, 71, made claims that the trial court erred by allowing testimony which violated the confrontation clause and hearsay rule, that he had ineffective assistance from his attorney for failing to to object to hearsay statements and that there wasn’t enough evidence to support his conviction.

The Seventh District Court of Appeals ruled that none of the defendant’s arguments had merit, affirming the conviction.

A jury found Spencer Kidder guilty on Sept. 21, 2023 of four counts of rape, a first-degree felony, two counts of sexual battery, a second-degree felony, and a single count of third-degree felony gross sexual imposition.

The first two rape charges covered the time period when the boy was under 10 years old from Jan 1, 2014 through July 16, 2018, with the other two rape charges covering the time after age 10 and under age 13 from July 17, 2018 to Dec. 31, 2020. The time period for the two counts of sexual battery and single count of gross sexual imposition all covered Jan. 1, 2014 to Dec. 31, 2020.

Bickerton sentenced him immediately to life in prison without the possibility of parole for each of the first two rapes, to be served concurrently to each other, then 10 years to life for the other two rapes to be served concurrently to each other but consecutive to the life without parole term, then an additional five years for the gross sexual imposition. The sentence for the sexual battery charges was merged as part of the rape sentence.

He was advised by the judge of his right to appeal, but no appeal was filed within the required 30-day timeframe by the end of October 2023.

The Seventh District Court of Appeals, however, granted his request to file a delayed appeal after he made the request in December 2024, 14 months after his conviction.

In the appeal, Kidder claimed four errors. Those errors included: the trial court allowing into evidence sexual assault examiner testimony that was truth-propensity testimony in disguise; the trial court allowing into evidence lay recapitulations of a child witness narrative in violation of the rule against hearsay and the confrontation clause; the trial court allowing conviction in the face of insufficient evidence; and the trial court allowing a conviction from proceedings infected with ineffective assistance of counsel.

In the first accusation of error, Kidder’s appellate attorney argued that a nurse practitioner who testified should not have been allowed to testify about her observations of the victim’s behavior during an interview or a diagnosis of “highly concerning for sexual abuse.”

The appellate court, though, noted the witness was qualified to offer an expert opinion since she was deemed an expert in child sexual assault and her testimony and diagnosis fit the parameters of case law as permitted testimony. The diagnosis wasn’t based solely on the victim’s narrative, but on other observations.

The appellate court said there was no error in admitting her testimony regarding her observations of the victim and her medical diagnosis.

For the next error, Kidder’s appellate attorney claimed that virtually every part of the state’s case was introduced through third-party witnesses, which violates the rule against hearsay and the confrontation clause. He had issues with testimony by a police officer, the victim’s mother, a school guidance counselor, the victim’s cousin and the victim’s friend, but the appellate court ruled the testimony of all the witnesses in question was admissible.

The appellate court also found that the evidence in the case was sufficient to convict the defendant and there was no prejudice caused by his trial counsel’s failure to object to what was admissible evidence.