State of Iowa v. Trent D. Smith
2016 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 26, 876 N.W.2d 180 (2016)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
For a domestic abuse victim's hearsay statement identifying their assailant to be admissible under the medical diagnosis or treatment exception, the proponent must establish a case-specific foundation showing the victim's motive was to promote treatment and that the assailant's identity was reasonably pertinent to the medical diagnosis or treatment of their physical, emotional, or psychological injuries.
Facts:
- On June 9, 2012, M.D. made a 911 call asking for help at her residence.
- Shortly after, M.D.'s mother called police, stating that Trent Smith had threatened M.D. and she was afraid of him.
- When officers arrived, they found M.D. visibly injured and shaken. M.D. told them she was hit and kicked in the head after investigating a noise in her home.
- M.D. identified her assailant as Trent Smith, stated he was the father of her child, and said he had been abusing her for ten years.
- Officers transported M.D. to a hospital emergency room for her injuries.
- At the hospital, M.D. told a nurse she was "assaulted by her baby’s daddy around midnight" and had been kicked in the head.
- In response to the nurse's standard screening questions, M.D. confirmed that she felt afraid of, had been hurt by, and was being taken advantage of by someone close to her.
- M.D. also told the treating doctor that she had been assaulted by her child's father.
Procedural Posture:
- Trent Smith was charged in Iowa district court (trial court) with domestic abuse assault with intent to cause serious injury and domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury.
- At a pretrial hearing, the district court ruled that M.D.'s statements to medical personnel identifying Smith were admissible under the medical diagnosis and treatment exception to the hearsay rule.
- Following a trial where medical personnel testified to M.D.'s statements, a jury found Smith guilty on both charges.
- Smith, as appellant, appealed his conviction to the Iowa Court of Appeals (intermediate appellate court).
- The Court of Appeals held that the statements to medical personnel were properly admitted and affirmed Smith's conviction.
- Smith sought, and the Iowa Supreme Court (highest court) granted, further review of the appellate court's decision.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a domestic abuse victim's statement to an emergency room nurse and doctor identifying her attacker fall within the hearsay exception for statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment under Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.803(4) when the State provides no evidence that the attacker's identity was reasonably pertinent to the victim's diagnosis or treatment?
Opinions:
Majority - Cady, Chief Justice
No. A domestic abuse victim's statement identifying her attacker does not fall within the hearsay exception for medical diagnosis or treatment without a proper evidentiary foundation showing the attacker's identity was reasonably pertinent to that diagnosis or treatment. The rationale for the exception is the patient's selfish motive to be truthful to receive effective medical care. While an assailant's identity can be pertinent to treating the emotional and psychological injuries common in domestic abuse, this pertinence cannot be assumed and must be established by the proponent of the evidence. In this case, the State failed to introduce any evidence showing that M.D.'s medical providers needed to know her attacker's identity to diagnose or treat her, as their care focused solely on her physical injuries. The court explicitly rejects creating a categorical rule that would automatically admit such identification statements in all domestic abuse cases, emphasizing that each case requires a specific foundation.
Dissenting - Waterman, Justice
Yes. The victim's statements identifying her attacker were properly admitted because such information is pertinent to treating a domestic abuse victim, and the court should adopt a categorical rule to that effect. The same reasoning that allows identification statements in child abuse cases applies to adult domestic abuse, as a provider must understand the victim's circumstances to treat psychological trauma and ensure their safety. The hospital's use of a standard domestic violence screening protocol demonstrates that the medical community considers the abuser's identity pertinent to treatment. Furthermore, the victim was prescribed antianxiety medication, indicating treatment beyond purely physical injuries. The dissent would also have affirmed the admission of the statements on the alternative ground that they qualified as excited utterances.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies and narrows the application of the medical diagnosis hearsay exception in Iowa domestic abuse cases by rejecting a categorical rule of admissibility for an abuser's identity. It places a significant affirmative burden on prosecutors to lay a specific evidentiary foundation in each case, requiring testimony from medical providers explaining exactly why the assailant's identity was pertinent to the victim's treatment. This ruling may make it more difficult to prosecute domestic violence cases where victims recant, as it limits a key source of evidence and prioritizes a case-by-case analysis and the rights of the accused over a broader, policy-based evidentiary shortcut.
