Ass'n v. Minnesota Pub. In certain circumstances, trial courts may admit as substantive evidence the hearsay statements of a child under the age of ten that allege, explain, deny, or describe an act of sexual contact or penetration performed on the child. This statutory exception to the hearsay rule requires both a finding of the statement's reliability and its inadmissibility under any other statute or rule of evidence. Because the statement's reliability renders it admissible under the Minnesota Rules of Evidence, we review its admissibility pursuant to the rules rather than the statute. See Minn. R. EvId.
Reliability is based on the totality of the circumstances surrounding the making of a statement.
While the interviewer had some prior knowledge of the alleged abuse and the complainant did not speak with the interviewer until three weeks after the incident, we cannot say the trial court erred in determining the complainant's hearsay statement exhibited sufficient indicia of reliability based on the totality of circumstances. The complainant's statement meets these additional requirements. First, the videotape was offered as evidence that Davis committed the acts underlying criminal sexual conduct in the first and second degrees. And third, introduction of the statement serves the purposes of the evidentiary rules and the interests of justice. Davis also argues the trial court failed to exclude certain irrelevant and prejudicial statements that the complainant made during the videotaped interview.