State v. Wingate

Summary

The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and held that the admission of the challenged expert testimony, even if improper vouching, was not plain error because the defendant failed to show that it probably affected the verdict. The Court also held that the indictment's incorrect statutory reference was a harmless scrivener's error because its factual allegations and the proceedings provided adequate notice of the offense charged. The Court of Appeals therefore erred in ordering a new trial.