State v. Jackson
2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 347
Mo. Ct. App.2014Background
- Defendant Jackson dated Victim and moved into her home in early 2011.
- On March 19, 2011, they used crack cocaine and argued, leading Victim to seek hospital aid.
- At Victim's home, Defendant physically assaulted her and coerced sex, including oral sex and rape.
- Victim was hospitalized with injuries and later diagnosed with post-concussive syndrome.
- Defendant was convicted of forcible rape, forcible sodomy, and first-degree domestic assault; sentenced as persistent offender.
- On appeal, Defendant challenged the admissibility of Victim’s statements to Dr. Hudson and Nurse Blaesinger as hearsay.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hearsay testimony admissibility | State argues statements were admissible for diagnosis/treatment. | Jackson argues statements were hearsay and improper bolstering. | Court held no abuse of discretion; admissibility affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Reed, 282 S.W.3d 835 (Mo. banc 2009) (standard of review for evidentiary decisions; abuse of discretion)
- State v. Skillicorn, 944 S.W.2d 877 (Mo. banc 1997) (hearsay generally inadmissible; exceptions for diagnosis/treatment)
- State v. Miller, 924 S.W.2d 513 (Mo.App.W.D.1996) (treating-physician testimony; relevance to diagnosis/treatment)
- State v. Hamilton, 892 S.W.2d 371 (Mo.App.E.D.1995) (prejudice requirement for hearsay error)
- State v. Isa, 850 S.W.2d 876 (Mo. banc 1993) (hearsay limits and testimonial framework)
- State v. Mozee, 112 S.W.3d 102 (Mo.App.W.D.2003) (admissibility when declarant is not required to testify)