THI RD DI VI SI ON

M C FA DDEN, C. J.

, D OYLE, P. J.

, and HODGES, J.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

https ://w w w

. ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s

D E A D LIN E S A R E N O LO N G E R TO LLE D IN T

H I S

C O U R T. A LL FILIN G S M U ST B E S U B M I TTE D WITH IN

TH E TIM E S S E T B Y

O U R C O U R T R U LE S

.

June 25, 2020



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A2 0 A0 18 5 . M CEADY v . THE STATE. DO-0 0 7 C

D O Y LE , Pres i d i n g J u d g e.

Fo l l owi n g a ju ry t ri al

, Arm as t er M cEad y was co n v i ct ed o f bu rg l ary

, 1 rap e, 2 an d

ag g rav at ed b at t ery

. 3 He ap pea l s f r o m t h e d en ial of h i s m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al

,

co n ten d in g t hat (1 ) th e ev id en ce was i ns u ffi ci en t t o s u p p o rt t h e g u i l t y verd i ct ; (2 ) t h e

t ri al co u rt erred b y ad m i t t i n g hears ay s t at em en t s fro m t h e v i ct i m u n d er OCGA § 2 4 -8

-

8 0 7 (t he res i d u al h ears ay ex cep t i o n ); an d (3 ) t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y ad m i tt i ng cert ai n

o t h er h ears ay s t at em en t s b y t h e v i ct i m u n d er OCGA § 2 4 -8 -8 0 3 (4 ) (t he m ed i cal

t reat m en t h ears ay ex cep t i o n ). Fo r t h e reas o n s t h at fo l l o w, we co n cl u d e t h at t h e

1 OCGA § 1 6 -7 -1 (b ).

2 OCGA § 1 6 -6 -1 (a) (1 ).

3 OCGA § 1 6 -5 -2 4 (a).ev i d en ce was s uffi ci en t

, bu t t h ere were p o t en t i al erro rs i n ad m it t in g t h e h e a r s a y

ev i d en ce. Nev ert h el es s

, b as ed o n t h e reco rd b efo re u s

, i n cl u d in g th e s t ro n g fo ren s i c

e v id en ce i d en t i fy i n g M cEad y an d t h e cu m u lat i ve n at u re o f t h e ch al l en g ed h ears a y,

we affi rm

.

Co n st ru ed i n fav o r o f t h e v erd i ct

, 4 t h e ev i d en ce s h o ws t h at 7 4 -y ear-o l d E. A.

l i ved wi t h h er ad u l t d au g ht er, Sh ei l a M at ch et t

, i n Val d o s t a

, G eo rg i a. E. A. was

p h y s i cal l y an d m en t al l y i n fi rm an d req u i red h el p co n du ct i ng b as ic dai l y t as k s

. In

Ap ri l 2 0 1 5

, Mat ch et t arri v ed h om e o n e ev en i ng an d fo u n d t h at h er m o t her h ad b een

b eat en an d rap ed

. Po li ce res p o n d e d t o t h e s cen e, an d E. A

. w as t ran s p o rt ed by

am bu l an ce t o t he em erg en cy ro o m wh ere s h e was ex am i n ed b y h os p it al m ed i cal s t aff.

E. A. s u ffered i n

ju ri es t o h er ey es

, jaw, an d face, an d s h e h ad t wo b ro ken ri bs

. Bas ed

o n E. A .’ s p res en t at i o n an d co m p l a i n t s

, h o s p i t al s t aff cal l ed i n an o u t s i d e s ex u al

a s s a u l t n u rs e ex am i n er (“ SANE”) t o perfo rm a s ex u al as s au l t ex am an d i n t erv i ew.

Th e SANE co ll ect ed b i o l o g i cal s am p l es f r o m E

. A.’ s cl ot h i n g an d b o d y

, an d E. A.

t o l d t h e SANE t h at s h e h ad b een rap ed

, b u t s h e di d n o t i d en t i fy h er at t a c k e r a t t h at

t i m e. At t ri al

, M at ch et t g av e h ears ay t es t i m o ny t hat o n t h e d ay aft er th e at t ack

, E. A.

s ai d t h at s h e reco gn i zed h er at t ack er’ s v oi ce as M cEad y ’ s

. M cEad y h ad d at ed

4 See S h o rt v. S t a t e , 2 3 4 Ga. Ap p

. 6 3 3

, 6 34 (1 ) (5 0 7 SE2 d 5 14 ) (1 9 9 8 ).

2M at ch et t o ff an d o n fo r s ev eral y ears

, an d E. A

. was fam il i ar w i t h h i m

. M at ch et t h ad

ju s t en d ed t h ei r rel at i o n sh i p t h e p rev i o u s m o n t h

.

Po l i ce ap p ro a c h ed McEad y

, wh o ag reed t o sp eak t o t hem aft er b ei n g

Mi r an d i z ed

. 5 M cEad y d en i ed b ei n g at t h e res id en ce an d g av e an al ib i

, w h i ch l at er d id

n o t ch eck o u t. M cEad y

ad m i tt ed t h at h e k n ew E. A. fro m h is ti m e d a t i ng M at ch et t

.

M cEad y al so ag reed t o g iv e a DNA s am p l e fro m a ch eek s wab

.

Th e Geo rg i a Bu reau o f In v es t ig at i o n p e r f o r m ed a DNA an al y s i s o n t h e

b i o l o g i cal an d cl o t h i n g s am p l es t ak en fro m t h e SANE’ s ex am

. Th e an al y s i s rev eal ed

t h e p res en ce of s em i n al fl u i d on E. A.’ s un d erwear an d t h e p res en ce of DNA fro m E.

A. an d fro m

M cEad y o n h er u n d erwear. No o th er i n d i v i d u al ’ s DNA was d et ect ed

.

Bas ed o n t h is ev i d en ce, M cEad y w as ch arg ed wi t h b u rg l ary

, rap e

, an d

ag g rav at ed b at t ery

. Fo l l owi ng a t ri al

, a ju ry fo u n d h i m g u i l ty o n each co u n t

, an d h i s

m o ti o n fo r n ew t ri al was d en ied . He n o w ap p eal s.

1

. M cEad y fi rs t arg u es t h at t h e ev i d en ce was i n s uffi ci en t t o s u p p ort t h e g ui l t y

v erd i ct . W e d i s ag ree.

W h en an ap p el l at e co u rt rev i ews t h e s u ffi ci en cy o f t h e ev i d en ce,

5 3 8 4 U. S. 4 36 (8 6 SCt 1 6 0 2 , 1 6 LE2 d 6 9 4) (1 96 6 ).

3t h e rel ev an t q u es t i o n i s wh et h er, aft er v i ewi n g th e ev i d en ce i n th e l i g h t

m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e pro s ecu ti o n

, a n y rat i on al t ri er o f fact co u l d h av e

fo u n d t h e es s en ti al el e m e n t s o f t h e cri m e b ey o n d a reas o n ab l e do u bt

.

Th i s fam i l i ar s t an dard gi v es fu l l pl ay t o t h e res p o n si b i l i t y of th e t ri er o f

f act fai rl y to res o l v e co n fl i ct s in t h e t es t i m o n y

, t o wei g h t he ev i d e n c e

,

an d t o d raw reas o n ab le i n feren ces fro m b as ic fact s t o u l t i m at e fact s

.

On ce a d efen d an t h as b een fo u n d gu i l t y o f t h e cri m e ch arg ed

, th e

fact fi n d er’ s ro l e as wei g her of t h e ev i d en ce i s p res erv ed t h ro u gh a l eg al

co n cl u s i o n t hat u po n j u d i ci al rev i ew a l l o f t h e evi d

en ce i s t o be

co n s i d ered i n t h e l i g h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e p ro s ecu t i o n. 6

Here, t h e ev i d en ce i s u n d i s p u t ed as to t he f a c t t h a t E

. A. w as at t ack ed an d

rap ed

. Her in

ju ri es w e r e o b v i o u s an d cl earl y cau s ed b y an as s ai l an t. E. A. was

b ed ri d d en du e t o h er ag e an d ot h er i n fi rm i ti es

, an d sh e was at h o m e al o n e. Th e m ai n

i s su e at t ri al w as t h e i den t i t y o f h er at t ack er. M cEad y arg u es t h at E. A. t o l d p o l i ce an d

t h e SANE nu rs e t h at sh e co u ld n o t id en t i fy h er at tack er, an d o n l y id en t i fi ed M cEad y

t h e n ex t d ay

, wh en s h e to l d M at ch et t

. M cEad y al s o rel i es o n t h e l a ck o f p h y s i cal

ev i d en ce g at h ered fro m t h e res i d en ce t h at t i ed h i m t o t h e s cen e.

Nev ert h el es s , t h e reco rd al s o s h o ws t hat E. A. was fri g ht en ed wh en s h e g av e

t h e co n fl i ct i ng s t at em en t s, an d t h e j u r y w as au t h o ri zed t o i nfer th at s h e o n l y fel t

6 (Ci t at i o n o m i t t ed ; em

p has i s i n o ri g i nal .) Ja cks o n v. Vi r g i n i a

, 44 3 U. S. 3 0 7,

3 1 9 (III) (B) (9 9 SCt 2 78 1 , 6 1 LE2 d 5 6 0 ) (1 9 7 9 ).

4co m fo rt ab l e di s cu s si n g th e at t ack wi t h her d au g h t er. Mo s t im po rt an t l y

, t h e r eco rd

s h o ws t h at s em i nal fl u i d an d M cEad y ’s DNA w ere fo u n d i n E. A.’ s u n d erwear; n o

o t h er fo rei g n DNA was fo u n d i n t h e s am p l es

. Fu rt h er, M cEad y ’ s al i bi d i d n o t ch eck

o u t wh en p o l i ce at t em

p t ed t o v eri fy i t

, an d i t i s un d is p u t ed t h at M cEad y h ad

k n o wl ed g e o f ho w t o en t er t h e h o u s e t h ro u g h a b ro k en d o or wi t h o u t a k ey

.

“ Res o l v i n g ev id en t i ary co nfl ict s an d i n co n s i s t en ces an d as s es s i n g wi t n es s cred i b i l i t y

are t he p ro v i n ce o f t h e fact fi n d er, n o t t h e ap p el l at e co u rt .” 7 Acco rd i ng l y

, t h e

ev i d e n c e am

pl y au t h o ri zed t h e ju ry t o fi n d t h at M cEad y co m m i t t ed t he cri m es

al l eg ed

. 8

2

. M cEad y al s o co n t en d s t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y ad m i t t i n g cert ai n h ears ay

t es t i m o ny fro m M at ch et t t h at E. A. t o l d h er o n e d ay aft er th e at t ack t h at M cEad y was

t h e p erp et rat or. W e co n cl u d e t h at t h e tri al co u rt d i d n ot f o l l o w t h e p ro p er t es t in

ad m i t t i ng t he ev i d en ce, b u t i n l i g h t o f t h e s t ro n g an d u n co n tro v ert ed DNA ev i d en ce

i d en t i fy i n g M cEad y

, t h is erro r d o es n o t warran t a ret ri al

.

7 ( C i t a t i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) McNeel y v. S t a t e

, 2 9 6 Ga. 4 2 2, 4 2 5 (1 )

(7 6 8 SE2 d 7 5 1 ) (2 0 1 5 ).

8 See Lewi s v. S t a t e

, 3 0 6 G a

. 45 5

, 4 5 8 -4 5 9 (1 ) (a) (8 3 1 SE2 d 77 1 ) (2 0 1 9 )

(h o l d i n g t h at t h e ev i d en ce, i n cl u d i n g a p os i t i v e DNA m at ch

, was s u ffi ci en t d e s p i t e

t h e d efen d an t ’ s h y

p o t h et ical arg u m en t th at h e d i d n ot rap e t h e v i ct im ); M a r t i n ez v.

S t a t e , 3 0 2 Ga. 8 6, 8 8 (1 ) (a) (8 05 SE2 d 4 4 ) (2 0 1 7 ) (s am e).

5At t ri al

, M at ch et t t es t ifi ed ab o u t a v i s i t w i t h E. A. t h e d ay aft er t h e rap e. On

d i rect

, t h e St at e as k ed M at ch et t

, “ W h o b ro u gh t u p t h e t o p i c o f t h e r a p e? ” an d aft er

M at ch et t rep l i ed t h at E. A. h ad , M cEad y ’ s co u n s el o b ject ed . Th e j u ry was ex cu s ed

,

an d co u n sel was al l o wed t o m ak e a reco rd of h i s o bject i o n, wh i ch ren ewed a p re-t ri al

o b ject i on t o th i s t es t i m o n y

. Th e co urt p rev i o u s l y h ad o v erru l ed M cEad y ’ s ch al l en g e

fo l l o w i n g a p re-t ri al h eari n g

, w h i c h r ul i n g was m em o ri al i zed in a wri t t en o rd er by

an o th er ju d g e, an d th e t ri al ju dg e ag ai n o v erru l ed t he o b ject i o n at t ri al

. Aft er t h e ju ry

was b ro u g h t b ack in

, M at ch et t t es ti fi ed t h at E. A. t o l d h e r t h a t sh e reco g n i zed

M cEad y ’ s v o i ce an d i d en ti fi ed h i m as t h e at t ack er.

Bo t h t h e p ret ri al ru l in g an d co n t em p o ran eo u s ru l i ng p u rp o rt ed t o ad m i t t h e

ev i d en ce u n d er a “ n eces s i t y ex cep t i o n ” b u t ci t ed t he cu rren t “ res i du al ex cep t i o n ” to

h ears ay u n d er OCGA § 2 4-8 -8 0 7

.

OCGA § 2 4 -8 -8 0 7 p ro vi d es , i n rel ev an t p art :

A s t at em en t n o t s p eci fi cal l y co v ered b y an y l aw b u t h av i n g eq u i v al en t

ci rcu m s t an ti al g u aran t ees o f tr ustw o r th in es s s h al l n o t be ex cl ud ed b y th e

h ears ay ru l e, i f t h e co u rt d et erm i nes t h at :

(1 ) Th e s t at em en t i s o ffered as ev i d en ce o f a m at eri al fact ;

6(2 ) Th e s t at em en t i s m ore p ro b at i v e o n t h e p o in t fo r wh i ch i t is o ffered

t h an an y o t h er ev i d en ce wh i ch th e p ro p on en t can p ro cu re t h ro u g h

reas o n ab l e effo rt s ; an d

(3 ) Th e g en e r a l p urp os es o f t h e ru les o f ev i d en ce an d t h e i n teres t s o f

ju s t i ce wi l l b es t be serv ed b y ad m i ss i on o f t he s tat em en t i n t o ev id en ce.

Th i s Co d e s ect io n “ i s b o rro wed fro m t h e Fed eral Ru l es o f Ev i den ce an d i s n o t a ru l e

t h at w as carri ed o v er fro m Geo rg i a’ s fo rm er E v i d en c e Co d e.” 9 Th u s

, u n l i k e t h e

n eces s i t y ex cep ti o n

, wh i ch n o l o n g er ap p l i es

, 1 0 t h e res i d u al ex cep t io n co n t ai n s n ew

req u i rem en t s n o t al read y in o u r cas e l aw befo re Geo rg i a ad o p ted t h e n ew Ev i d en ce

Co d e i n 2 0 1 3

. 1 1

9 S t a t e v. Ho lmes , 3 0 4 Ga. 5 2 4 , 5 2 9 (2 ) (a) (8 2 0 SE2 d 2 6 ) (2 0 1 8 ).

1 0 See i d

. at 5 2 8 n

. 4 (“ Becau s e t hi s cas e was t ri ed aft er t h e 2 0 1 3 effect i v e d at e

o f Geo rg i a’ s n ew Ev i d en ce Co d e, t h e fo rm er ‘ n eces s i t y ’ ex cep t i o n t o t he ru l e ag ai n s t

h ears ay , d es cri b ed i n fo rm er OCGA § 2 4 -3 -1 , was n o t ap p l i cab l e i n t h i s cas e.”).

1 1 See i d

. at 5 30 ( 2 ) (a) (h o l d i n g th at th e t ri al co u rt erred b ecau s e “ i t rel i ed

p ri m ari l y u p o n cas es d eci d ed u n d er Geo rg i a’ s fo rm er Ev i d en ce Co de, wh i ch are n o

l o n g er ap p li cab le”). See al s o Da vi s v. S t a t e

, 3 53 G a. A p p

. 65 1

, 6 5 5 (2 ) (8 3 9 SE2 d

1 8 4 ) (2 0 20 ) (“ Th i s ru l e was d es i g n ed t o b e u s ed v ery rarel y [] an d o n l y i n ex cep t i o n al

c i r c u m s t an ces

. Th e ru l e ap p l i es o n l y wh en cert ai n ex cep t i o n al g u aran t ees o f

t ru s t wo rt h in es s ex i s t an d wh en h i g h d eg rees of p ro b at iv e n e s s an d n eces s i t y are

p res en t

. . . Th e u n av a i l a b i l it y o f t h e d ecl aran t i s n o t a prereq ui s i t e t o ad m i s s i b i l i t y

u n d er [OCGA § 2 4 -8 -8 0 7 ] .”) (p u n ct u at i on o m i t t ed ).

7Th e s e fact o rs i n cl ud e a co n s i d erat i o n o f th e t ru s t wo rt h i nes s o f th e

o ri g in al d ecl aran t

, g iv en t h e ci rcu m s t an ces i n w h i ch t h ey w ere fi rs t

m ad e, an d w h et h er g u aran t ees o f tr u s t w o r th i n es s ex i s t t h at are

eq u i val en t in s i g n i fi can ce t o t h e s p eci fi c h ears ay ex cep t i o n s en u m erat ed

i n Fed eral Ru l es o f Ev i d en ce 8 0 3 an d 8 0 4 . Th erefo re, s u ch g uaran t ees

m u s t b e e q u i v al en t to cro ss -ex am i n ed fo rm er t es t i m o n y

, st at em en t s

u n d er a b el i ef o f i m

p en d i n g d e a t h

, s t at em en ts ag ai n s t i n t eres t

, an d

s t at em en t s o f p ers o n al o r fam i l y h i s t o ry

. 1 2

Here, t h e t ri al co u rt d id n o t en g ag e i n t h i s an al y s i s

, n o r d o t h e p art i es ci t e to

cu rren t cas e l aw el u ci d at i n g it s ap p l i cat i o n

. Nev ert h el es s

, p ret erm i t ti n g wh et h er t h e

h ears ay co u l d b e ad m i s s i b le u n d er a p ro p er Ru l e 8 0 7 an al y s is

, “ ev en w h ere an ab u s e

o f d i s cret i o n i s s h o wn

, t h ere are n o g ro u n d s fo r rev ers al i f t h e erro r d i d n o t affect a

‘ su b s t an t i al ri g h t ,’ an d t h u s h arm

, t h e d efen d an t.” 1 3 T o m ak e t h i s d et erm i nat i o n

, “ we

rev i ew t h e reco rd d e n ov o an d wei g h t h e ev i d en ce as we wo u l d ex p ect reas o n ab l e

1 2 (Pu n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Ho l mes

, 3 0 4 Ga. at 5 2 9 (2 ) (a).

1 3 Ve n t u r in o v. S ta t e

, 3 06 Ga. 3 9 1

, 3 9 3 (2 ) (8 3 0 SE2 d 11 0 ) (2 0 1 9 ), ci t i n g

OCGA § 2 4 -1 -1 0 3 (a) (“ Erro r sh al l n o t b e p red i cat ed u p o n a ru li n g wh i ch ad m i t s o r

ex cl u d es ev i d en ce u n l es s a s ub s t an t i al ri g h t o f t h e p art y i s affect ed .”).

8ju ro rs to h av e do n e

. . . , an d we as s es s wh et h er it i s h i g h l y p ro b ab l e t h at t h e erro r d id

n o t co nt ri b u t e t o t h e v erd i ct .” 1 4

As n o t ed ab ov e

, t h e h ears ay t es t im o n y M cEad y ch al l en g es was E. A.’ s

i d e n t i fi cat io n o f M cEad y as h er at t ack er. In l i g h t o f t he un co n t ro v ert ed an d

u n ex pl ai n ed ev i d en ce t h at s em i n al fl u i d an d M cEad y ’ s DNA were fo u nd i n E. A.’ s

u n d erwear i m

m ed i at el y aft er t h e rap e, i t i s hi g hl y p ro b a b l e t h at an erro n eo u s

ad m i s s i o n o f E. A.’ s h ears ay i d en t i fi cat i o n d i d n o t co n t ri b u t e t o t h e v erd i ct

.

M o reo v er, E

. A.’ s id en t i fi cat io n was cu m u l at i ve of t he un reb u tt ed DNA

ev i d en ce i d en t i fy i n g M cEad y

. I n o t h er s i m i l ar cas es

, Geo rg ia co u rt s h av e h el d t h at

t h e i m p ro p er ad m i s s i o n o f h ears ay t es t i m o n y was h arm l es s wh en i t was cu m u l at i v e

o f o t h er p ro p erl y

ad m i tt ed ev i d en ce. 1 5 In l i gh t o f t h e reco rd b efo re u s

, we co n cl u d e

1 4 (Pu n ct u at i o n o m i tt ed .) Id

., ci t i n g S mi t h v. S t a t e

, 2 9 9 Ga. 4 2 4, 43 2 (7 8 8 SE2 d

4 3 3 ) (2 0 1 6 ).

1 5 See, e.g

., S

a n ch i o u s v. S t a t e

, 3 5 1 Ga. Ap p

. 6 1 1

, 6 16 (1 ) (b ) (8 3 1 SE2 d 8 4 3 )

(2 0 1 9) (h o l d i ng th at t h e ad m i s s i o n o f a f o ren s i c rep o rt was h arm l es s in l i g h t o f

p ro p erl y ad m i t t ed t es ti m o n y reg ard i ng t h e co n ten t s o f t h e rep ort ); W i l l i a ms v. S t a t e

, 3 0 4 Ga. Ap p

. 5 9 2

, 5 9 5 (3 ) (6 9 6 SE2 d 5 1 2 ) (2 0 1 0 ) (h ol d in g th at ad m i s s i o n o f h ears ay

ev i d en ce

— t h at t he v i ct i m was p reg n an t wi th t h e d efen d an t ’ s ch i l d

— was h arm l es s

b ecau s e t h er e w a s p ro p erl y ad m i t t ed D N A ev i d en ce s h o wi n g t h e s am e). See al s o

O C G A § 2 4 -8 -8 02 (“ H ears ay s h al l n o t b e ad m i s s i b le ex cep t as p ro vi d ed b y t h i s

art i cl e; p ro v i d e d

, h o w e v er, t h at i f a p art y d o es n o t p ro p erl y o b ject t o h ears ay

, t h e

o b ject i on s h al l be d eem ed wai v ed

, an d t h e h ears ay ev id en ce sh al l b e l eg al ev i d en ce

an d ad m i s s i b l e.”).

9t h a t th e DNA ev i d en ce o f M cEad y ’ s i d en t i ty ren d ered h arm l es s an y erro r i n t h e

ad m i s s i o n o f E. A.’ s h ears ay i d en t i fi cat i o n

.

3

. L as t

, McEad y ch al l en g es t h e ad m is s io n o f th e s t at em en t s E. A. m ad e t o t h e

SANE d u ri n g t he sex ual as s au lt ex am i n at io n

. H e ch aract eri zes t hes e st at em en t s as an

“ al l eg ed i d en t i fi cat io n o f” M cEad y

, b u t t he SANE t es t i fi ed t h at E. A. d i d no t i d en t i fy

an y o n e i n p art icu l ar. 1 6 Rat h er, acco rd i ng t o t h e SANE, E. A. o n l y “ t o l d m e t hat i t was

an u n k no wn b l ac k m a le.” Th e SANE p ro ceed ed t o t es t i fy

, wi t h o u t ob ject io n

, as to

s o m e o f E. A.’ s d es cri p ti o n s o f t h e at t ack

, s u ch as t h at t h ere was p h y s i cal v i o l en ce

an d res trai n t

, t h reat s t o k i l l h er, an d v ag i nal an d an al co n t act b y t he at t ack er’ s p en i s

,

an d t h at s h e h ad n ot h ad s ex i n y ears

. N ev ert h el es s

, M cEad y d i d ob ject at t ri al to

o t h er des cri pt i o n s o f t h e at t ack as reco u nt ed by t h e SANE, i ncl u d i n g E. A.’ s

s t at em en t s t h at “ h e p u s h e d m e d o w n on t h e b ed ro o m fl o o r[,] an d h e s ai d t h at h e

wan ted s o m e p ----y

. I t ol d h i m no

. . . . He g o t o n t o p o f m e an d s ai d i f I t el l h e wo u ld

co m e b ack an d k i ll m e. H e pu l l ed m y p an t s d o wn an d h ad s ex wi t h m e i n m y v ag i n a

an d m y b u t t

. . . .” Ov er M cEad y ’ s o b ject i o n, th e t ri al co u rt ad m i t ted t he tes t im o n y as

1 6 To t h e ex t en t t hat M c E a d y was i d en t i fi ed

, o ur an al y s is i n Di v i s i o n 2

d em o n s t rat es t h at an y

erro r was h arm l es s

.

10s t at em en t s m ad e fo r p u rp o s es o f m ed i cal d i ag n o s i s o r t reat m en t

. M cEad y n o w arg u es

t h e ad m is s i o n o f t h i s t es t i m o n y was erro r.

Un d er OCGA § 2 4 -8 -8 0 3 (4 ), “ [s ] t at em en t s m ad e fo r p urp o s es o f m ed i cal

d i ag n o s is o r t reat m en t an d d es cri bi n g m ed ical hi s t o ry

, o r p as t o r p res en t s y m p t o m s

,

p ai n

, o r s en s at i o ns

, or th e i n cep t i o n o r g en eral c h aract er o f t he cau s e o r ex t ern al

s o u rce th ereo f i n s o far as reas o n ab l y p ert i n en t t o d i ag n o s i s o r t reat m en t ” are ex cep t ed

fro m ex cl u s i o n a s h ears ay

. W h en ap p l y i n g th i s ru l e, “ we l o o k t o fed eral ap p el l at e

p reced en t [as o f t h e effect i v e d at e o f th e n ew E v i d en ce Co de] u n t i l a Geo rg i a

ap p el l at e co urt d eci d es t he i s s u e u nd er t h e n ew Co d e.” 1 7

In s im i l ar co n t ex t s

, t h e El ev en t h Ci rcu i t Co u rt o f Ap p eal s h as ap p l i ed t h i s

h ears ay ex cep ti o n an d h el d t hat ad m it t in g a v i ct i m ’ s st at em en t t o t r ea t i ng med i ca l

s t af f d es cri b i n g “ rap e” as t h e cau s e o f i n ju ri es was n ot an ab u s e o f d i scret io n u n d er

F e d eral Ru l e 8 0 3

, 1 8 w h ich i s nearl y i d en t i cal t o OCGA § 2 4 -8 -8 0 3 (4 ). 1 9 Th i s i s

1 7 S t a t e v. Al ma n z a , 3 0 4 Ga. 5 5 3 , 5 5 8 (2 ) (8 2 0 SE2 d 1 ) (2 0 1 8 ).

1 8 See Un i t ed S ta t es v. W

i l l i a ms

, 5 7 8 Fed

. Ap p x

. 8 72

, 8 76 (III) (1 1t h Ci r. 2 0 1 4 )

(u n p ub l is h ed ).

1 9 See Al ma n za , 3 0 4 Ga. at 5 5 7 -5 5 8 (2 ).

11b ecau s e s u c h d e s cri p t i o n s are ad m i s s i b l e t o t h e ex t en t t hey rel at e t o “ cau s at i o n

reas on ab l y

p ert i nen t t o p urp o s es o f d i ag n o s es an d t reat m en t .” 2 0

Here, E

. A. i n i ti al l y was s een b y h o sp i t al em erg en cy ro o m m ed ical st aff. Th e

t reat i n g em erg en cy ro o m p h y s i ci an t es t i fi ed t h at E. A. g av e h i m s u f f i ci en t

i n fo rm at i o n fo r h i m t o p ro v i d e m ed i cal t reat m en t, an d h e m ad e t h e d eci s io n t o ad m i t

E. A. t o t h e h o s p i t al ’ s t rau m a s erv i ce. Th e SANE was cal l ed i n t o p erfo rm a fo ren s i c

ex am i n at i o n b ecau s e reg u l ar n u r s i n g st aff are n o t q u al ifi ed t o p erfo rm s u ch

ex am i n at i o n s , an d t h e SANE t es t i fi ed t h at b y t h e t im e s h e arri v ed

, t h e d eci s i o n h ad

b een m ad e t o ad m i t E. A. Th e SANE ex p l ai n ed t h e pu rp o s e o f h er in t erv i ew q u es t i on s

as fo l l o ws : “ By l i st en i ng t o h er s t o ry I can k i n d o f gau g e wh ere I co u l d p ot en t i al l y

fi nd ev i d en ce, s o t h at wo u l d k in d o f l ead m e in t h e d irect i o n d ep en d in g o n w h at s h e

s ay s an d wh ere I s h o ul d l o o k fo r ev i d en ce.” Th e SANE’ s p h y s i cal ex am was g eared

t o ward a h ead -t o -t o e d o cu m en t at i o n o f i n ju ri es

, i n cl u d i n g t h e co l l ect i o n o f DNA

ev i d en ce fo r an al y s i s s eek i ng t h e i d en t i t y o f an y fo rei g n DNA fo u n d. Bas ed o n t h i s

reco rd

— i ncl u d i n g t h e fact th at h o s p i t al s t aff h ad in d ep en d en t l y ev al u at ed E. A., h ad

g at h ered en o u g h in fo rm at i o n t o m ak e t reat m en t d eci si on s

, an d h ad m ad e t he d eci s i o n

t o ad m i t E. A

. fo r t rau m a t reat m en t in d ep en d en t o f t h e SANE i nt er v i e w

— i t i s

2 0 (Pu n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) W i l l i a ms , 5 7 8 Fed . Ap p x . at 8 7 6 (III).

12q u es ti o n ab l e wh et h er t h e h ears ay el i ci t ed b y t h e SANE i nt erv i ew i n t h is cas e was

reas on ab l y p ert i n en t t o d i ag n o s i s an d t reat m en t

, as op p os ed t o gat h eri n g ev i d en ce. 2 1

Bu t t h e fu l l reco rd d em o ns t rat es t h at we n eed n o t res o l v e t h i s q u es t i on b ecau s e

t h e h arm res u l t i n g fro m an y erro r in ad m i tt i ng t h e ch al l en g ed s t at em en t s E. A. m ad e

t o t h e SANE wo u ld n o t warran t rev ers al

. Fi rs t

, as n o t ed ab o v e, E. A. d i d n o t i d en t i fy

M cEad y d u ri n g t h e SANE i n t erv i ew, an d M cEad y ’ s en um erat i o n i s p red i cat ed o n an

al l eg ed hears ay i d en t i fi cat i o n o f M cEad y

. Th e SANE i nt erv i ew p ri m ari l y d es cri b ed

t h e rap e i t s el f, an d i t d id n o t i m p l i cat e M cEad y o t h er t h an b y s ay i n g t h e p erp et rat o r

was an u nk n o wn bl ack m al e. Be c a u s e McEad y d id no t ch al l en ge t he n o t io n t h at a

rap e o ccu rred

— o n l y h is i d en t i fi cat i o n

— t h e S A N E in t erv i ew d i d n o t m at eri al l y

u n d erm i n e h i s d efen s e.

Seco n d

, t o t h e ex t en t th at t h e ch al l en g ed d es cri p t i on s of t h e rap e were v i o l en t

,

t h e SANE al read y h ad t es t i fi ed t h at E. A. d is cl os ed v i o l en t i n ju ri es

, s h e h ad n o t h ad

2 1 Cf. i d

. (h o l d i n g t h at a v i ct i m ’ s i n it i a l d i s cl o s u re ma d e t o a t rea t i n g n u r

s e t h at

t h e v i ct i m was “ rap ed ” was ad m i s s i b le); Un i t ed St a t es v. Ir o n Th u n d er

, 71 4 F2 d 7 6 5,

7 7 2 -7 7 3 (II) (B) (8 t h Ci r. 1 9 8 3 ) (“ Ev en th o ug h [t h e t reat i n g ph y s i ci an ’ s ] ex am i n at i o n

an d q u es t i o n i n g o f [t h e v i ct i m ] were p urs u an t to a st an d ard ized p ro t o co l d es i g n ed in

l arg e m eas u re t o p rep are fo r cri m i n al pro s ecu t io n

, Ru l e 8 0 3 (4 ) ap p l i es t o st at em en t s

m ad e fo r t he p u rp o s e o f m ed i cal d i ag n os i s as wel l as t o s t at em en t s m ad e fo r t h e

p u rp o s e o f m ed i cal t reat m en t

. [Th e v i ct im ] res p o nd ed t o q u es t i on s b y [t h e t r e a t i n g

p h y s i ci an ,] wh i ch were i n t en d ed n o t o n l y t o s h ed l i g h t o n h er p h y s i cal

, em o t i o n al

,

an d m en t al co nd i t i o n , b ut wh i ch al s o co u l d s erv e as a b as i s fo r t reat m en t.”).

13s ex i n y ears

, h er at t ack er had hel d h er d own an d t h reat en ed h er, s h e was an x i o u s an d

fearfu l

, an d t here was n o n co n s en s u al g en i tal co n t act

. M cEad y d id n o t o b

ject t o t h i s

t e s t i m o n y, m o s t o f wh i ch was h ears ay

, b u t “ [i ] f a p art y d o es no t p ro p erl y ob ject t o

h ears ay

, t h e o b

ject i o n s h al l be d eem ed wai v ed

, an d t h e h ears ay ev i d en ce s h al l b e

le ga l e v ide nc e a nd a d

m issible

. ” 2 2 Fu rt h er, t h ere was no n -h ears ay t es t i m ony d e sc r ibing

E. A. ’s p h ys i c a l i n

ju ri es an d h er fri g h t en ed d em ean or, an d t h e fact th at t h e i n ju ri es

were co ns i s t en t wi t h a v i o l en t at t ack

. Th u s

, E. A.’ s d es cri pt i o ns o f th e at t ack t o t h e

SANE were es s en t ial l y

cu m u l at i v e o f o t h er l eg al ev i d en ce d es cri b i n g t h e at t ack

.

Las t

, as no t ed i n Di vs i o n 2

, t h e DNA ev i d en ce l i n k i n g M cEad y to th e rap e was

u n ex pl ai n ed

. M cEad y d i d no t t es t i fy i n h i s d efe n s e

, b u t h e o ffered a weak al i bi

d efen s e t h at was wh o l l y u nd erm i n ed b y t h e fact t h at h i s al l eg ed co h ab it an t co u l d n ot

rem em b er i f M cEad y l i ved wi t h h er at t h e t i m e o f t h e rap e, n o r M cEad y ’ s

wh ereab o u t s at t he ti m e o f t h e rap e, an d b y t h e fact t h at M cEad y g av e a di fferen t al i bi

t o p ol i ce. Nei t h er t h e al ib i w i t nes s no r t h e s u p p o sed al i b i M cEad y as sert ed t o p o l i ce

co rro b o rat ed M cEad y ’ s cl ai m o f al i b i.

2 2 (Pu n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Ma s o n v. St a te

, 3 5 3 G a. Ap p

. 4 0 4

, 40 8 (3 ) (8 3 7 SE2 d

7 1 1 ) (2 0 2 0 ), q uo t i n g OCGA § 2 4 -8 -8 02

.

14Bas ed o n t h is reco rd

, we c o n c l u d e t h at an y erro r i n t h e ad m i s s i o n o f t h e

ch al l en g ed p o rt i o n o f E. A.’ s h ears ay acco u n t o f t he rap e d o es n o t req u i re rev ers al

. 2 3

Th e ev i d en ce of McEad y ’ s id en t i fi cat i on was v ery s t ro n g an d n o t m at eri al l y ai d ed by

t h e SANE’ s t es t im o ny n o r u nd erm i n ed b y M cEad y ’ s d efen s e, a n d t h e h ears ay

ev i d en ce o f t h e at t ack it sel f l arg el y was cu m u lat i v e of ot h er u n ch al l en g ed ev i d en ce

t h at was ad m i t ted . Th erefo re, t h i s en u m erat i o n d oes n o t req u i re rev ers al

. 2 4

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . McFa d

d en , C. J., a nd

Ho d g es , J., co n cu r

.

2 3 See, e.g

., S

a wyer v. S t a t e

,

_

_ G a

.

_ _ (2 ) (b ) (8 39 SE2 d 5 8 2 ) (Cas e No

. S1 9 A1 34 1

, d eci d ed Feb

. 2 8

, 2 0 2 0 ) (i n t h e co n t ex t o f i n effect i v e as s i s t an ce fo r fai l u re

t o o b ject t o ch aract er ev i den ce, t h e ch al l en ged “ s t at em en t was h arm l es s b ecau s e i t

was cu m ul at i v e o f a s ig n i fi can t v o l u m e of ev i den ce al read y p res en t ed t o t h e ju ry

w i t h o u t o b

ject i o n ”); Ha mb r i ck v. S t a t e

, 3 5 3 Ga. A p p

. 6 6 6

, 67 4 (2 ) (b ) (8 3 9 SE2 d

6 6 4 ) (2 0 2 0 ); S

a nch i o u s , 3 5 1 Ga. Ap p . at 6 1 6 (1 ) (b ).

2 4 See H o l d en v. S ta te

, 31 4 Ga. Ap p

. 3 6, 3 9 (2 ) (7 22 SE2 d 87 3 ) (2 01 2 ) (h o l d i n g

t h at t h e st ren g t h o f th e p h y s i cal ev i d en ce ren d ered harm l es s erro n eo u s ad m i s s i o n o f

o t h er ev i d en ce).

15