Schmidt v. State
Wyoming Supreme Court
1DissentFox, Justice
[¶58] I respectfully dissent. I would find that the district court abused its discretion when it found that the statements DV made to Ms. Hoffman fit under the hearsay exception for statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment. W.R.E. 803(4).
[¶59] Ms. Hoffman was one of three school personnel who questioned DV in order to determine what had occurred. There was no indication that DV believed Ms. Hoffman was providing medical care, and there is no evidence that Ms. Hoffman provided DV any medical care. I would tend to agree with the majority when it states “that Ms. Hoffman…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Ohio v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
- Hopkinson v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1981
- Goldade v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. MyattSupreme Court of Kansas · 1985
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.