New Mexico Supreme Court
State of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Petitioner v. Bernadino Mendez, Sr., Defendant-Respondent
October 7, 2010148 N.M. 761
Summary
The court held that statements made during a sexual assault nurse examiner examination cannot be categorically excluded under the medical-diagnosis-or-treatment hearsay exception merely because the examination also serves forensic purposes. Admissibility must be determined statement by statement, with primary attention to trustworthiness, the declarant's motivation to obtain medical care, and the statement's pertinence to diagnosis or treatment. The court reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded for the trial court to reconsider each statement. No separate opinions were filed.
Holding
- Interlocutory appellate jurisdiction. The State's interlocutory appeal was appropriate because the excluded statements identifying the alleged perpetrator and describing the alleged criminal acts could constitute substantial proof of a material fact, and the record did not indicate that the appeal was taken for purposes of delay.
- Admissibility of statements made during a SANE examination under the medical-diagnosis-or-treatment hearsay exception. Statements made to a SANE nurse may be admissible under the medical-diagnosis-or-treatment hearsay exception even when the examination also has a forensic purpose. Courts must evaluate each statement individually, focusing on its trustworthiness, the declarant's motivation to seek medical care, and whether a medical provider could reasonably rely on it for diagnosis or treatment; the statement cannot be excluded solely because it was made during a SANE examination or because the overall encounter had a forensic purpose.
Docket 31,723
Cited authorities
- Rule 803(4)
- 38 N.M. L. Rev. 529
- 82 Ind. L.J. 917
- Fed. R. Evid. 803
- 38 N.M. L. Rev. 529
- Fla. Stat. Ann. § 90.803