Court Opinion

ID: 9715299
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:59:37.285822+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:33.317460
License: Public Domain

DISSTENTING OPINION BY
STEVENS, J.:
¶ 1 I respectfully dissent from the Majority Opinion, and I would affirm the trial court.
¶ 2 Generally, Pa.R.E. 804(a)(4) provides that unavailability as a witness includes situations in which the declarant “is unable to be present or to testify at the hearing because of death_” Pa.R.E. 804(a)(4); however, the tender years exception to the hearsay rule is set forth in 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 5985.1. As the Commonwealth asserts in its brief, the word “unavailable” appeared in 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 5985.1 when it was originally enacted in 1989, although a specific definition of the term did not appear until the 1996 amendments. Brief for the Commonwealth at 5-6. The Commonwealth reasons that as a result, the legislative history of the statute reveals the term “unavailable” continues to include the general meaning of unavailable, as that word appeared in the statute prior to the enactment of § (a)(1). Brief for the Commonwealth at 6. The Commonwealth also cogently asserts:
If the legislature only wanted this rule to apply when the emotional distress existed, it would not have even used the term unavailable[;] it would have merely stated that the out-of-court statements could be admitted when the child witness was suffering emotional distress or it would have specifically defined the term as such for purposes of this section.
Brief for the Commonwealth at 6-7.
¶ 3 I agree with this analysis and would affirm the trial court.
¶ 4 Moreover, the statute provides that the trial court must determine, based upon evidence presented, that were the child to testify as a witness, he or she would suffer serious emotional distress such that his or her ability to communicate would be hampered. 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 5985.1(a.1). The rule also provides that “the court may do all of the following in making such a determination:”
(1) observe and question the child, either inside or outside the courtroom.
(2) Hear testimony of a parent or custodian or any other person, such as a person who has dealt with the child in a medical or therapeutic setting.
42 Pa.C.S.A. § 5985.1(a.1)(1)(2) (emphasis added).
¶ 5 The plain meaning of the statute requires the conclusion that the trial court need not hear from the child directly in camera if, as herein, the circumstances prévent it.
¶ 6 I agree with the Majority that “we are unable to rewrite a statute or legislate from the bench; we are only to adjudicate what the plain language of a statute means.” Nevertheless, though it is possible the legislature did not anticipate the specific, unfortunate circumstance in the case sub judice when it enacted § (a.1), *662the tender years exception to the hearsay rule neither requires that the trial court engage in the aforementioned measures prior to determining unavailability, nor does it require that the child be alive for such a determination be made. Without in any way violating the plain meaning rule, the trial court could determine based upon its own review of the certified record, including a review of the testimony of the witnesses to the child’s statements, that were the child alive and required to testify, he or she would be seriously traumatized. As the trial court herein eloquently explained:
This court must look upon H.S.’s inability to communicate in the same way a[c]ourt would an allegedly abused child who would not speak due to intimidation, or could not speak due to injury, mental capacity or lack of command of the English language.
Trial Court Opinion and Order, 2/4/04, at 4.
¶ 7 As such, I respectfully disagree with the Majority’s statement that “the trial court was unable to make a determination under § (a.1) due to H.S.’s tragic and untimely demise,” and its ultimate holding that “H.S.’s death prevented the trial court from making a determination under § (a.1).”
¶8 I would affirm the trial court and find that the trial court correctly ruled the statements of the minor child were admissible at trial under the tender years exception to the hearsay rule where said minor child is deceased.