The State of New Hampshire v. George Woods (New Hampshire 1988)

Summary

The court reversed the defendant’s conviction because the trial court improperly admitted hearsay statements made by the child to her mother, brother, and physician. The mother’s statement was not a sufficiently spontaneous excited utterance, the brother’s testimony qualified under neither the excited-utterance nor prior-consistent-statement exception, and the physician’s testimony did not satisfy the medical-diagnosis-or-treatment exception because the visit was intended to determine whether the child was truthful. The court could not find the errors harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Holding

Admissibility of the child’s statements to her mother as excited utterances. The statements were inadmissible because the record did not establish that they were made while the child remained under the continuing stress of nervous excitement necessary to overcome the one-day delay and support spontaneity.

Admissibility of the child’s statements to her brother as excited utterances or prior consistent statements. The brother’s testimony was inadmissible under both asserted theories. The record did not show that the child spoke under the stress of nervous excitement, and the defendant’s cross-examination did not charge the child with recent fabrication, improper influence, or motive and did not elicit a prior inconsistent statement.

Admissibility of the child’s statements to the physician under the medical-diagnosis-or-treatment exception. The physician could not testify to the child’s statements under the medical-diagnosis-or-treatment exception because the statements were not made for the purpose of obtaining medical diagnosis or treatment.

Harmlessness of the erroneous hearsay admissions. The erroneous admission of the hearsay testimony was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, requiring reversal of the conviction.

Summary

Holding

Cited by