Georgia v. Almanza

by
The Georgia Supreme Court granted review in this case to decide whether hearsay identifying an alleged sexual abuser of a child victim was admissible under the hearsay exception for statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment found in OCGA 24-8-803 (4) (“Rule 803 (4)”). New Georgia Rule 803 (4) was materially identical to both an existing federal rule and a provision of the old Georgia Evidence Code. Federal case law construing Federal Rule of Evidence 803 (4) has held that the identity of an alleged child sexual abuser may, in certain circumstances, be admissible. Georgia case law construing the old state rule held that such evidence was not admissible. Because the fundamental rule of the new Georgia Evidence Code was that federal appellate case law applied when a Georgia rule was materially identical to a federal rule and had not yet been interpreted by a Georgia appellate court, the Supreme Court concluded the new Evidence Code displaced the old Georgia precedent and so federal case law applied here. Accordingly, Rule 803 (4) permitted the admission of identity in child sexual abuse cases when reasonably pertinent to medical diagnosis or treatment. The Georgia Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals’s decision to the contrary and remanded with instructions to vacate the trial court’s order and remand for further proceedings. View "Georgia v. Almanza" on Justia Law