STATE v. ALMANZA (2018)

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

The STATE v. ALMANZA.

A17A1270

Decided: December 13, 2018

D. Victor Reynolds, District Attorney, Michael S. Carlson, Charles P. Boring, Amelia G. Pray, John R. Edwards, Lindsay B. Gardner, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellant. The Merchant Law Firm, Ashleigh B. Merchant, John B. Merchant III; Cindi L. Yeager, for appellee. Melvin L. Hewitt, Jr.; Brian K. Fortner, Emily K. Richardson, Sean A. Garrett; Andrew H. Agatston; Donna Coleman-Stribling, Anna W. Davis, amici curiae.

In State v. Almanza, 304 Ga. 553, 820 S.E.2d 1 (2018), the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed the judgment of this Court in State v. Almanza, 344 Ga. App. 38, 807 S.E.2d 517 (2017). Accordingly, we vacate our earlier opinion and adopt the opinion of the Supreme Court as our own. In accordance with that opinion, we vacate that part of the trial court's order finding inadmissible statements made by the mother of the alleged child molestation victim to the child's physicians, in which the mother identified Almanza as the perpetrator of the alleged molestation. We remand for the trial court to consider whether the statements at issue are admissible under OCGA § 24-8-803 (4), pursuant to the test set forth in United States v. Renville, 779 F.2d 430 (8th Cir. 1985).

Judgment vacated and case remanded with direction.

Gobeil, Judge.

McFadden, P. J., and Coomer, J., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network