Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Black Hawk county emergency call center received a 911 call from M.D. She gave her address and said, 'Just get here, thank you, please!' M.D.'s mother called the center on a nonemergency line. She told the phone operator that M.D. asked her to call the police to report that Trent Smith had threatened M.D. and that M.D. was afraid of him. Two officers found M.D. sitting in a car outside the residence with her five-year-old daughter and a dog. The officers checked the residence for intruders and began their investigation by interviewing M.D. M.D. told the officers after hearing a sound she was 'hit' by something when going downstairs in the dark to investigate. She lost consciousness after she was kicked in the head. She told the officers she believed the assailant had entered her residence through a locked door. M.D. eventually identified her assailant as 'Trent Daniel,' whom dispatch officers later identified as D. M.D. said D did not live at her residence but had been abusing her for ten years. She mentioned one prior assault when D beat her after he was released from jail following an arrest for domestic abuse. M.D. was treated by a doctor and a nurse for her injuries at the emergency room. She was 'in a moderate amount of distress' and 'extremely shaken up.' The nurse asked her to explain what had happened. She responded that she was 'assaulted by her baby's daddy around midnight.' She told the nurse that she had been kicked in the head and right arm, and she felt that her front teeth were loose. The nurse asked several standard screening questions. Three questions pertained to domestic abuse. IM.D. indicated she did 'feel afraid of/threatened by someone close to me.' She also responded she had 'been hurt by someone.' She further agreed that 'someone is taking advantage of [her].' The doctor did not make any domestic abuse diagnosis or render any treatment for emotional or psychological injuries based on the identity of the perpetrator. The identity of the assailant or the effects of domestic abuse was not mentioned as a part of any treatment or diagnosis. She underwent radiology testing and other medical care. The diagnosis pertained solely to the physical injuries sustained by M.D. which were a closed head injury, cervical strain, facial contusion, and arm contusions. M.D. was taken to the police station. A statement was presented to her but she refused to sign. D was charged with domestic abuse assault with intent to cause serious injury and domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury. M.D. intended to recant her statements identifying D as her assailant. P declared it intended to prove D was the assailant through the statements made by M.D. to the officers and medical personnel. D claims the statements made were not part of any medical diagnosis or treatment. The district court determined the identification statements were admissible at trial under the medical treatment and diagnosis exception to the rule against hearsay. It determined M.D.'s statements to police were admissible at trial under the excited-utterance exception to the rule against hearsay. P never argued the statements to the nurse and doctor were also admissible as excited utterances. At trial, there was no testimony that M.D. was told how the questions related to her treatment or diagnosis, and there was no testimony of how they were used or needed by medical providers in her treatment or diagnosis. D was found guilty. D appealed. The court of appeals found the district court erred by admitting M.D.'s statements to police as excited utterances. It upheld the other statements for medical diagnosis or treatment. D appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co