Following a jury trial, Sheila Adorno was convicted on two counts of cruelty to children in the first degree, and her co-defendant, Mercedes Ramirez collectively “defendants”, was convicted on four counts of child molestation. Both appeal their convictions and the denial of their respective motions for new trial. Adorno challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting her convictions, and Ramirez contends that the trial court erred in reopening the evidence after closing arguments were completed and in denying his claim that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to move for a mistrial after the trial court reopened the evidence. Because the charges arose from the same incidents and the defendants were tried together, we have consolidated their separate appeals for review. And for the reasons set forth infra , we affirm in both cases. Viewed in the light most favorable to the jury’s guilty verdict,1 the evidence shows that in April 2008, ten-year-old S. R. and twelve-year-old N. R. were living in an apartment with their mother, Adorno, their mother’s boyfriend, Ramirez, and two other younger half-siblings. On April 18, 2008, S. R. was at school when she told one of her teachers during class that she had a friend whose stepfather came into her bedroom at night and “did things” to her. The teacher responded that the friend should tell her mother, to which S. R. replied that her friend had done so but that her mother did not believe her. Obviously concerned by the discussion, the teacher asked S. R. if she was actually talking about herself. S. R. then began crying, admitted that she was describing her own situation, and told her teacher that Ramirez had been sexually molesting her. When the teacher explained that she would have to tell the school principal and authorities what had happened, S. R. became even more upset and claimed that her mother would “whoop her hard” if she learned that S. R. told anyone about Ramirez’s actions.
Nevertheless, that same day, the teacher informed the school’s counselor about S. R.’s outcry, and thereafter, the counselor met with S. R. to discuss the matter. Although S. R. initially denied that she as opposed to the unnamed friend had been sexually molested, she eventually began crying and admitted that Ramirez had inappropriately touched her on several occasions and that she had told her mother about the molestation on at least two of those occasions. At the end of their discussion, the counselor told S. R. that she had to call the police. And again, S. R. became more upset and stated that her mother would whip her. But that same day, the counselor contacted the police, and an officer was sent to interview S. R. and her older sister, N. R.
