State v. Gonzales

In the absence of overwhelming evidence of guilt, courts have held that “where erroneously admitted hearsay evidence significantly reinforces the . . . testimony at trial, the admission of those statement constitutes error requiring reversal of the defendant’s conviction.” State v. Wood, 253 Or App 97, 101, 289 P3d 348 (2012).

Defendant appealed a judgment of conviction for the offenses of application of a Schedule II controlled substance to the body of another person, attempted sexual abuse in the first degree, attempted assault in the second degree, unlawful use of a weapon, assault in the fourth degree, and menacing. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s admission of complainant’s videotaped statement. On appeal, Defendant argued that the videotape was not harmless and did not qualify under the hearsay exception because the evidence did not support that complainant’s statements were made for a medical diagnosis or treatment purposes. In response, the State argued that the videotape did qualify because complainant was being checked for medical reasons when the statement was made and recorded. In the absence of overwhelming evidence of guilt, courts have held that “where erroneously admitted hearsay evidence significantly reinforces the . . . testimony at trial, the admission of those statement constitutes error requiring reversal of the defendant’s conviction.” State v. Wood, 253 Or App 97, 101, 289 P3d 348 (2012). The Court of Appeals concluded that the trial court erred in admitting complainant’s videotape statement because it was hearsay and did not qualify under the hearsay exception. Additionally, the Court held that the State did not have sufficient evidence to objectively prove that complainant provided her statements to obtain medical services. Reversed and Remanded.