State v. Almanza

Full title: THE STATE v. ALMANZA.

Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Dec 13, 2018

348 Ga. App. 290 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018)

348 Ga. App. 290

Opinion

A17A1270

12-13-2018

The STATE v. ALMANZA.

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.

Gobeil, Judge.

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.

Gobeil, Judge. 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.

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