Opinion
NO. 2017 KW 1407
02-05-2018
STATE OF LOUISIANA v. MICHAEL ROBERTSON
In Re: State of Louisiana, applying for supervisory writs, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 07-12-0625. BEFORE: WHIPPLE, C.J., McDONALD AND CHUTZ, JJ.
WRIT APPLICATION GRANTED. The district court rulings granting the defendant's motions in limine are reversed. The district court abused its discretion in preliminarily finding the evidence at issue to be inadmissible. The victim's statements to the doctors in response to their questions in 2008 and 2010 were part of reasonable treatment and therapy to prevent recurrence and future injury to the victim and were not unduly or unfairly prejudicial. See State v. Robertson, 2015-2095 (La. 2/5/16), 183 So.3d 1287 (per curiam); State v. Koederitz, 2014-1526 (La. 3/17/15), 166 So.3d 981. The victim's statements to the OCS/DCFS staff are not a violation of the Confrontation Clause, as their primary purpose was not to make an out-of-court substitute for trial testimony by a young child who likely had no understanding of the criminal justice system. See Ohio v. Clark, ___ U.S. ___, 135 S.Ct. 2173, 192 L.Ed.2d 306 (2015). Furthermore, the court prematurely excluded testimony by lay witnesses as to their opinion without allowing the state to present the underlying facts at trial, which could show that their opinion testimony was rationally based on the perception of the witnesses and helpful to a clear understanding of testimony or a fact at issue. See La. Code Evid. art. 701.
WRC
VGW
JMM
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT /s/_________
DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT
FOR THE COURT