The Wisconsin Court of Appeals has upheld the conviction of Ryan W. Babcock for first-degree sexual assault of a child under 12 and exposing a child to harmful materials. The court's decision, filed on October 29, 2026, comes after Babcock challenged the effectiveness of his trial counsel and the admissibility of certain evidence during his trial. This ruling is significant as it reinforces the legal standards surrounding child testimony and the evaluation of counsel's performance in criminal cases.

Babcock's conviction stems from incidents involving a four-year-old girl, referred to as A.B., in March 2021. The State of Wisconsin charged Babcock with serious offenses after a forensic interview with A.B. revealed troubling allegations against him. The court's affirmation of the conviction highlights the importance of how child testimony is handled in legal proceedings.

Background

In April 2021, the State filed a criminal complaint against Ryan Babcock, charging him with first-degree sexual assault of A.B. and exposing her to harmful material. The alleged incidents occurred on the same day, and A.B. was just four years old at the time. Prior to the charges, a forensic interview was conducted with A.B., which was recorded and later became a pivotal piece of evidence in the trial.

The recorded interview lasted approximately 36 minutes and included a break during which A.B. initially denied any wrongdoing. However, after the break, she made statements implicating Babcock in sexual acts. The State sought to introduce this recording as evidence under Wisconsin law, which allows recorded statements from child witnesses to be admitted for their truth under certain conditions.

During the trial, Babcock's defense counsel objected to the admission of the recording but also sought to have the jury view it, believing it contained elements that could undermine A.B.'s credibility. The trial court allowed the recording to be presented as evidence, leading to Babcock's conviction by a jury in October 2022. Following the trial, Babcock filed a postconviction motion, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel and errors in the trial court's rulings.

The Ruling

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment and the order denying Babcock's postconviction motion. The court addressed Babcock's claims that his trial counsel was ineffective for not requesting a specific jury instruction on evaluating child testimony and for not consulting with an expert on forensic interviews of children.

The court ruled, "Babcock fails to show that trial counsel’s failure to ask the trial court to give WIS JI–CRIMINAL 340 was deficient performance."

Additionally, the court found that the trial court did not err in allowing the State to admit the forensic interview recording under Wisconsin Statutes. The court noted that the recording met the necessary criteria for trustworthiness, emphasizing that A.B.'s statements were made shortly after the alleged incidents and were clear and detailed.

Impact

This ruling has implications for how courts handle child testimony and the standards for evaluating the effectiveness of legal counsel. By upholding the conviction, the Court of Appeals reinforced the importance of protecting child witnesses in legal proceedings and the admissibility of their statements under specific statutory guidelines.

The decision also serves as a reminder for defense attorneys about the critical nature of jury instructions and the potential consequences of not consulting experts when dealing with complex issues such as child testimony. The court's analysis indicates that even if counsel's performance is not perfect, it may still fall within the acceptable range of professional assistance.

What's Next

Babcock's legal team has the option to appeal the decision to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, as the court's ruling is subject to further review. However, details regarding any potential appeal or related cases were not available in the court filing.