State v. Wade

15 Citing cases

  1. State v. Lowe

    140 N.H. 271 (N.H. 1995)   Cited 6 times
    Holding that four-year-old child's presence in familiar location, where child had previously received medical care, supported trial court's finding that statements were reliable

    Where the declarant is a child, we require extra care in determining the declarant's intent: "[T]he proponent of Rule 803 (4) statements must present evidence establishing that the child had the requisite intent, by showing that the child made the statements understanding that they would further the diagnosis and possible treatment of the child's condition." State v. Wade, 136 N.H. 750, 755, 622 A.2d 832, 835 (1993). "This finding may be based upon circumstantial evidence."

  2. State v. Lynch

    169 N.H. 689 (N.H. 2017)   Cited 14 times
    Ruling that defendant's statement, "I guess the only thing I can do is probably stop talking and get a lawyer," was not an unambiguous invocation of the right to silence or counsel because statement was equivocal and defendant did not stop talking after making the statement

    We have explained that diagnosis need not inevitably result in treatment for statements to qualify under the rule; however, the diagnosis must have been sought with the purpose of treatment, if necessary. State v. Wade, 136 N.H. 750, 755, 622 A.2d 832 (1993). Thus, the statements must have been made for the purpose of "medical diagnosis or treatment, as opposed to solely for the purpose of enabling a physician to testify."

  3. State v. Carol D

    97 Wn. App. 355 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 9 times

    The record must affirmatively demonstrate the child made the statements understanding that they would further the diagnosis and possible treatment of the child's condition. See State v. Wade, 136 N.H. 750, 622 A.2d 832 (1993); R.S. v. Knighton, 125 N.J. 79, 96, 592 A.2d 1157, 1166 (1991); Renville, 779 F.2d 430. Cases from other jurisdictions that apply the same standard to such a declarant as is applied in situations involving adults ignore the underpinning of the rule.

  4. State v. Carol M.D

    89 Wn. App. 77 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 22 times
    Holding that the nine year old victim was not too young to understand the importance of being truthful with her therapist

    The record must affirmatively demonstrate the child made the statements understanding that they would further the diagnosis and possible treatment of the child's condition. See State v. Wade, 136 N.H. 750, 622 A.2d 832 (1993); R.S. v. Knighton, 125 N.J. 79, 96, 592 A.2d 1157, 1166 (1991); Renville, 779 F.2d 430. Cases from other jurisdictions that apply the same standard to such a declarant as is applied in situations involving adults ignore the underpinning of the rule.

  5. State v. Munroe

    161 N.H. 618 (N.H. 2011)   Cited 8 times
    Upholding admission of seven-year-old victim's statements to doctor

    This is because "[i]t is difficult for a court to discover whether a young child completely understands the purpose for which information is being obtained from her." State v. Wade, 136 N.H. 750, 755 (1993). Thus, it is necessary to establish that the child had the requisite intent "by showing that the child made the statements understanding that they would further the diagnosis and possible treatment of [her] condition."

  6. State v. Letendre

    161 N.H. 370 (N.H. 2011)   Cited 5 times
    Indicating a rule similar to Rule 611 grants the court discretion to station a victim advocate near the witness during testimony

    This is because "[i]t is difficult for a court to discover whether a young child completely understands the purpose for which information is being obtained from her." State v. Wade, 136 N.H. 750, 755 (1993). The defendant argues that the first part was not met because E.M.

  7. State v. Sweeney

    151 N.H. 666 (N.H. 2005)   Cited 22 times
    Stating that we will not reverse a trial court's decision regarding a motion for a bill of particulars "unless the defendant shows that it was clearly untenable or unreasonable to the prejudice of his case"

    As the proponent of the statement, the defendant had the burden of proving that it met the requisites of Rule 803(4). See State v. Wade, 136 N.H. 750, 755 (1993). We hold that the trial court reasonably determined that he failed to meet this burden.

  8. State v. Lynch

    854 A.2d 1022 (R.I. 2004)   Cited 98 times
    Holding jurors "would not be unduly surprised or prejudiced" by defendant's daughter angrily rushing from the stand toward defendant because they already knew of the daughter's allegations of defendant's sexual abuse

    A declarant's motive in making the statement must be consistent with seeking diagnosis or treatment. See, e.g.,State v. Hildreth, 582 N.W.2d 167, 169-70 (Iowa 1998); State v. Wade, 622 A.2d 832, 835 (N.H. 1993). The trial justice considered this dilemma, noting:

  9. State v. Soldi

    145 N.H. 571 (N.H. 2000)   Cited 13 times
    Referring to the " Roberts test"

    "The guarantee of trustworthiness is that no one would willingly risk medical injury from improper treatment by withholding necessary data or furnishing false data to the physician who would determine the course of treatment on the basis of that data." State v. Wade, 136 N.H. 750, 622 A.2d 832, 835 (1993) (quotation omitted). The defendant argues that the statements at issue are not trustworthy because the statements were made to an emergency room physician with whom the victim had "no prior relationship of trust," the statements were made while the victim was intoxicated, and the victim subsequently renounced the contents of the statements under oath.

  10. State v. White

    145 N.H. 544 (N.H. 2000)   Cited 20 times
    Holding that "demonstrably false" means "clear and convincingly untrue"

    Id. at 303-04, 726 A.2d at 1278 (quotation omitted). While we have required affirmative evidence on the record of a child declarant's intent, see State v. Wade, 136 N.H. 750, 755, 622 A.2d 832, 835 (1993), this intent can be established by circumstantial evidence. See Lowe, 140 N.H. at 273, 665 A.2d at 742.