{ "attribution": { "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com", "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:utah-case-no-20230983-2025-11-28", "cite_as": "NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:utah-case-no-20230983-2025-11-28)", "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision", "version": "legal-2026-10-12", "fingerprint": "ewai:us:2a3d67", "proof": "sha256:339e6141be2cf8ef5d669fd5e134f524ffeabcf4267ae6474b3507422a6557c1", "jurisdiction": "us", "lang": "en", "publisher": "NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal", "terms": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om" }, "brand_source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "item": { "schema_version": "1.0.0", "id": "us:utah-case-no-20230983-2025-11-28", "jurisdiction": "us", "lang": "en", "brand_source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "brand": { "product": "NovaCopilot", "platform": "ExploreWorldAI", "infrastructure": "ExploreWorld Legal", "infrastructure_url": "legal.exploreworldai.com", "legal_entity": "Valkiv Ventures AB", "permanent_url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot", "source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "powered_by": "Powered by NovaCopilot", "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor" }, "sections": [ { "title": "Front matter", "paragraphs": [ "para_1", "para_2", "para_3", "para_4", "para_5", "para_6", "para_7", "para_8", "para_9", "para_10", "para_11", "para_12", "para_13", "para_14", "para_15", "para_16", "para_17", "para_18", "para_19", "para_20", "para_21", "para_22", "para_23", "para_24", "para_25", "para_26", "para_27", "para_28", "para_29", "para_30", "para_31", "para_32", "para_33", "para_34", "para_35", "para_36", "para_37", "para_38", "para_39", "para_40", "para_41", "para_42", "para_43", "para_44", "para_45", "para_46", "para_47", "para_48", "para_49", "para_50", "para_51", "para_52", "para_53", "para_54", "para_55", "para_56", "para_57", "para_58", "para_59", "para_60", "para_61", "para_62", "para_63", "para_64", "para_65", "para_66", "para_67", "para_68", "para_69", "para_70", "para_71", "para_72", "para_73", "para_74", "para_75", "para_76", "para_77", "para_78", "para_79", "para_80", "para_81", "para_82", "para_83", "para_84", "para_85", "para_86", "para_87", "para_88", "para_89", "para_90", "para_91", "para_92", "para_93", "para_94", "para_95", "para_96", "para_97", "para_98", "para_99", "para_100", "para_101", "para_102", "para_103", "para_104", "para_105", "para_106", "para_107", "para_108", "para_109", "para_110", "para_111", "para_112", "para_113", "para_114", "para_115", "para_116", "para_117", "para_118", "para_119", "para_120", "para_121", "para_122", "para_123", "para_124", "para_125", "para_126", "para_127", "para_128", "para_129", "para_130", "para_131", "para_132", "para_133", "para_134", "para_135", "para_136", "para_137", "para_138", "para_139", "para_140", "para_141", "para_142", "para_143", "para_144", "para_145", "para_146", "para_147", "para_148", "para_149", "para_150", "para_151", "para_152", "para_153", "para_154", "para_155", "para_156", "para_157", "para_158", "para_159", "para_160", "para_161", "para_162", "para_163", "para_164", "para_165", "para_166", "para_167", "para_168", "para_169", "para_170", "para_171", "para_172", "para_173", "para_174", "para_175", "para_176", "para_177", "para_178", "para_179", "para_180", "para_181", "para_182", "para_183", "para_184", "para_185", "para_186", "para_187", "para_188", "para_189", "para_190", "para_191", "para_192", "para_193", "para_194", "para_195", "para_196", "para_197", "para_198", "para_199", "para_200", "para_201", "para_202", "para_203", "para_204", "para_205", "para_206", "para_207", "para_208", "para_209", "para_210", "para_211", "para_212", "para_213", "para_214", "para_215", "para_216", "para_217", "para_218", "para_219", "para_220", "para_221", "para_222", "para_223", "para_224", "para_225", "para_226", "para_227", "para_228", "para_229", "para_230", "para_231", "para_232", "para_233", "para_234", "para_235", "para_236", "para_237", "para_238", "para_239", "para_240", "para_241", "para_242", "para_243", "para_244", "para_245", "para_246", "para_247", "para_248", "para_249", "para_250", "para_251", "para_252", "para_253", "para_254", "para_255", "para_256", "para_257", "para_258", "para_259", "para_260", "para_261", "para_262", "para_263", "para_264", "para_265", "para_266", "para_267", "para_268", "para_269", "para_270", "para_271", "para_272", "para_273", "para_274", "para_275", "para_276", "para_277", "para_278", "para_279", "para_280", "para_281", "para_282", "para_283", "para_284", "para_285", "para_286", "para_287", "para_288", "para_289", "para_290", "para_291", "para_292", "para_293", "para_294", "para_295", "para_296", "para_297", "para_298", "para_299", "para_300", "para_301", "para_302", "para_303", "para_304", "para_305", "para_306", "para_307", "para_308", "para_309", "para_310", "para_311", "para_312", "para_313", "para_314", "para_315", "para_316", "para_317", "para_318", "para_319", "para_320", "para_321", "para_322", "para_323", "para_324", "para_325", "para_326", "para_327", "para_328", "para_329", "para_330", "para_331", "para_332", "para_333", "para_334", "para_335", "para_336", "para_337", "para_338", "para_339", "para_340", "para_341", "para_342", "para_343", "para_344", "para_345", "para_346", "para_347", "para_348", "para_349", "para_350", "para_351", "para_352", "para_353", "para_354", "para_355", "para_356", "para_357", "para_358", "para_359", "para_360", "para_361", "para_362", "para_363", "para_364", "para_365", "para_366", "para_367", "para_368", "para_369", "para_370", "para_371", "para_372", "para_373", "para_374", "para_375", "para_376", "para_377", "para_378", "para_379", "para_380", "para_381", "para_382", "para_383", "para_384", "para_385", "para_386", "para_387", "para_388", "para_389", "para_390", "para_391", "para_392", "para_393", "para_394", "para_395", "para_396", "para_397", "para_398", "para_399", "para_400", "para_401", "para_402", "para_403", "para_404", "para_405", "para_406", "para_407", "para_408", "para_409", "para_410", "para_411", "para_412", "para_413", "para_414", "para_415", "para_416", "para_417", "para_418", "para_419", "para_420", "para_421", "para_422", "para_423", "para_424", "para_425", "para_426", "para_427", "para_428", "para_429", "para_430", "para_431", "para_432", "para_433", "para_434", "para_435", "para_436", "para_437", "para_438", "para_439", "para_440", "para_441", "para_442", "para_443", "para_444", "para_445", "para_446", "para_447", "para_448", "para_449", "para_450", "para_451", "para_452", "para_453", "para_454", "para_455", "para_456", "para_457", "para_458", "para_459", "para_460", "para_461", "para_462", "para_463", "para_464", "para_465", "para_466", "para_467", "para_468", "para_469", "para_470", "para_471", "para_472", "para_473", "para_474", "para_475", "para_476", "para_477", "para_478", "para_479", "para_480", "para_481", "para_482", "para_483", "para_484", "para_485", "para_486", "para_487", "para_488", "para_489", "para_490", "para_491", "para_492", "para_493", "para_494", "para_495", "para_496", "para_497", "para_498", "para_499", "para_500", "para_501", "para_502", "para_503", "para_504", "para_505", "para_506", "para_507", "para_508", "para_509", "para_510", "para_511", "para_512", "para_513", "para_514", "para_515", "para_516", "para_517", "para_518", "para_519", "para_520", "para_521", "para_522", "para_523", "para_524", "para_525", "para_526", "para_527", "para_528", "para_529", "para_530", "para_531", "para_532", "para_533", "para_534", "para_535", "para_536", "para_537", "para_538", "para_539", "para_540", "para_541", "para_542", "para_543", "para_544", "para_545", "para_546", "para_547", "para_548", "para_549", "para_550", "para_551", "para_552", "para_553", "para_554", "para_555", "para_556", "para_557", "para_558", "para_559", "para_560", "para_561", "para_562", "para_563", "para_564", "para_565", "para_566", "para_567", "para_568", "para_569", "para_570", "para_571", "para_572", "para_573", "para_574", "para_575", "para_576", "para_577", "para_578", "para_579", "para_580", "para_581", "para_582", "para_583", "para_584", "para_585", "para_586", "para_587", "para_588", "para_589", "para_590", "para_591", "para_592", "para_593", "para_594", "para_595", "para_596", "para_597", "para_598", "para_599", "para_600", "para_601", "para_602", "para_603", "para_604", "para_605", "para_606", "para_607", "para_608", "para_609", "para_610", "para_611", "para_612", "para_613", "para_614", "para_615", "para_616", "para_617", "para_618", "para_619", "para_620", "para_621", "para_622", "para_623", "para_624", "para_625", "para_626", "para_627", "para_628", "para_629", "para_630", "para_631", "para_632", "para_633", "para_634", "para_635", "para_636", "para_637", "para_638", "para_639", "para_640", "para_641", "para_642", "para_643", "para_644", "para_645", "para_646", "para_647", "para_648", "para_649", "para_650", "para_651", "para_652", "para_653", "para_654", "para_655", "para_656", "para_657", "para_658", "para_659", "para_660", "para_661", "para_662", "para_663" ], "kind": "front_matter" }, { "title": "Confrontation Clause targeted,” id., its admissibility turns on", "paragraphs": [ "para_664", "para_665", "para_666", "para_667", "para_668", "para_669", "para_670", "para_671", "para_672", "para_673", "para_674", "para_675", "para_676", "para_677", "para_678", "para_679", "para_680", "para_681", "para_682", "para_683", "para_684", "para_685", "para_686", "para_687", "para_688", "para_689", "para_690" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_691", "para_692", "para_693", "para_694", "para_695", "para_696", "para_697", "para_698", "para_699", "para_700", "para_701", "para_702", "para_703", "para_704", "para_705", "para_706", "para_707", "para_708", "para_709", "para_710", "para_711", "para_712", "para_713", "para_714", "para_715", "para_716", "para_717", "para_718", "para_719", "para_720", "para_721", "para_722", "para_723", "para_724", "para_725", "para_726", "para_727", "para_728", "para_729", "para_730", "para_731", "para_732", "para_733", "para_734" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_735", "para_736", "para_737", "para_738", "para_739", "para_740", "para_741", "para_742", "para_743", "para_744", "para_745", "para_746", "para_747", "para_748", "para_749", "para_750", "para_751", "para_752", "para_753", "para_754", "para_755", "para_756", "para_757", "para_758", "para_759", "para_760", "para_761", "para_762", "para_763", "para_764", "para_765", "para_766", "para_767", "para_768", "para_769", "para_770", "para_771", "para_772", "para_773", "para_774", "para_775", "para_776", "para_777", "para_778" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_779", "para_780", "para_781", "para_782", "para_783", "para_784", "para_785", "para_786", "para_787", "para_788", "para_789", "para_790", "para_791", "para_792", "para_793", "para_794", "para_795", "para_796", "para_797", "para_798", "para_799", "para_800", "para_801", "para_802", "para_803", "para_804", "para_805", "para_806", "para_807", "para_808", "para_809", "para_810", "para_811", "para_812", "para_813", "para_814", "para_815", "para_816", "para_817", "para_818", "para_819", "para_820", "para_821", "para_822" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_823", "para_824", "para_825", "para_826", "para_827", "para_828", "para_829", "para_830", "para_831", "para_832", "para_833", "para_834", "para_835", "para_836", "para_837", "para_838", "para_839", "para_840", "para_841", "para_842", "para_843", "para_844", "para_845", "para_846", "para_847", "para_848", "para_849", "para_850", "para_851", "para_852", "para_853", "para_854", "para_855", "para_856", "para_857", "para_858", "para_859", "para_860", "para_861", "para_862", "para_863", "para_864", "para_865", "para_866" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_867", "para_868", "para_869", "para_870", "para_871", "para_872", "para_873", "para_874", "para_875", "para_876", "para_877", "para_878", "para_879", "para_880", "para_881", "para_882", "para_883", "para_884", "para_885", "para_886", "para_887", "para_888", "para_889", "para_890", "para_891", "para_892", "para_893", "para_894", "para_895", "para_896", "para_897", "para_898", "para_899", "para_900", "para_901", "para_902", "para_903", "para_904", "para_905", "para_906", "para_907", "para_908", "para_909", "para_910" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_911", "para_912", "para_913", "para_914", "para_915", "para_916", "para_917", "para_918", "para_919", "para_920", "para_921", "para_922", "para_923", "para_924", "para_925", "para_926", "para_927", "para_928", "para_929", "para_930", "para_931", "para_932", "para_933", "para_934", "para_935", "para_936", "para_937", "para_938", "para_939", "para_940", "para_941", "para_942", "para_943", "para_944", "para_945", "para_946", "para_947", "para_948", "para_949", "para_950", "para_951", "para_952", "para_953", "para_954" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_955", "para_956", "para_957", "para_958", "para_959", "para_960", "para_961", "para_962", "para_963", "para_964", "para_965", "para_966", "para_967", "para_968", "para_969", "para_970", "para_971", "para_972", "para_973", "para_974", "para_975", "para_976", "para_977", "para_978", "para_979", "para_980", "para_981", "para_982", "para_983", "para_984", "para_985", "para_986", "para_987", "para_988", "para_989", "para_990", "para_991", "para_992", "para_993", "para_994", "para_995", "para_996", "para_997", "para_998" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_999", "para_1000", "para_1001", "para_1002", "para_1003", "para_1004", "para_1005", "para_1006", "para_1007", "para_1008", "para_1009", "para_1010", "para_1011", "para_1012", "para_1013", "para_1014", "para_1015", "para_1016", "para_1017", "para_1018", "para_1019", "para_1020", "para_1021", "para_1022", "para_1023", "para_1024", "para_1025", "para_1026", "para_1027", "para_1028", "para_1029", "para_1030", "para_1031", "para_1032", "para_1033", "para_1034", "para_1035", "para_1036", "para_1037", "para_1038", "para_1039", "para_1040", "para_1041", "para_1042" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1043", "para_1044", "para_1045", "para_1046", "para_1047", "para_1048", "para_1049", "para_1050", "para_1051", "para_1052", "para_1053", "para_1054", "para_1055", "para_1056", "para_1057", "para_1058", "para_1059", "para_1060", "para_1061", "para_1062", "para_1063", "para_1064", "para_1065", "para_1066", "para_1067", "para_1068", "para_1069", "para_1070", "para_1071", "para_1072", "para_1073", "para_1074", "para_1075", "para_1076", "para_1077", "para_1078", "para_1079", "para_1080", "para_1081", "para_1082" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1083", "para_1084", "para_1085", "para_1086", "para_1087", "para_1088", "para_1089", "para_1090", "para_1091", "para_1092", "para_1093", "para_1094", "para_1095", "para_1096", "para_1097", "para_1098", "para_1099", "para_1100", "para_1101", "para_1102", "para_1103", "para_1104", "para_1105", "para_1106", "para_1107", "para_1108", "para_1109", "para_1110", "para_1111", "para_1112", "para_1113", "para_1114", "para_1115", "para_1116", "para_1117", "para_1118", "para_1119", "para_1120", "para_1121", "para_1122", "para_1123", "para_1124", "para_1125" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1126", "para_1127", "para_1128", "para_1129", "para_1130", "para_1131", "para_1132", "para_1133", "para_1134", "para_1135", "para_1136", "para_1137", "para_1138", "para_1139", "para_1140", "para_1141", "para_1142", "para_1143", "para_1144", "para_1145", "para_1146", "para_1147", "para_1148", "para_1149", "para_1150", "para_1151", "para_1152", "para_1153", "para_1154", "para_1155", "para_1156", "para_1157", "para_1158", "para_1159", "para_1160", "para_1161", "para_1162", "para_1163", "para_1164", "para_1165", "para_1166", "para_1167", "para_1168", "para_1169" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1170", "para_1171", "para_1172", "para_1173", "para_1174", "para_1175", "para_1176", "para_1177", "para_1178", "para_1179", "para_1180", "para_1181", "para_1182", "para_1183", "para_1184", "para_1185", "para_1186", "para_1187", "para_1188", "para_1189", "para_1190", "para_1191", "para_1192", "para_1193", "para_1194", "para_1195", "para_1196", "para_1197", "para_1198", "para_1199", "para_1200", "para_1201", "para_1202", "para_1203", "para_1204", "para_1205", "para_1206", "para_1207", "para_1208", "para_1209", "para_1210", "para_1211", "para_1212", "para_1213" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1214", "para_1215", "para_1216", "para_1217", "para_1218", "para_1219", "para_1220", "para_1221", "para_1222", "para_1223", "para_1224", "para_1225", "para_1226", "para_1227", "para_1228", "para_1229", "para_1230", "para_1231", "para_1232", "para_1233", "para_1234", "para_1235", "para_1236", "para_1237", "para_1238", "para_1239", "para_1240", "para_1241", "para_1242", "para_1243", "para_1244", "para_1245", "para_1246", "para_1247", "para_1248", "para_1249", "para_1250", "para_1251", "para_1252", "para_1253" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1254", "para_1255", "para_1256", "para_1257", "para_1258", "para_1259", "para_1260", "para_1261", "para_1262", "para_1263", "para_1264", "para_1265", "para_1266", "para_1267", "para_1268", "para_1269", "para_1270", "para_1271", "para_1272", "para_1273", "para_1274", "para_1275", "para_1276", "para_1277", "para_1278", "para_1279", "para_1280", "para_1281", "para_1282", "para_1283", "para_1284", "para_1285", "para_1286", "para_1287", "para_1288", "para_1289", "para_1290", "para_1291", "para_1292", "para_1293", "para_1294", "para_1295", "para_1296", "para_1297" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1298", "para_1299", "para_1300", "para_1301", "para_1302", "para_1303", "para_1304", "para_1305", "para_1306", "para_1307", "para_1308", "para_1309", "para_1310", "para_1311", "para_1312", "para_1313", "para_1314", "para_1315", "para_1316", "para_1317", "para_1318", "para_1319", "para_1320", "para_1321", "para_1322", "para_1323", "para_1324", "para_1325", "para_1326", "para_1327", "para_1328", "para_1329", "para_1330", "para_1331", "para_1332", "para_1333", "para_1334", "para_1335", "para_1336", "para_1337", "para_1338", "para_1339", "para_1340", "para_1341", "para_1342" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1343", "para_1344", "para_1345", "para_1346", "para_1347", "para_1348", "para_1349", "para_1350", "para_1351", "para_1352", "para_1353", "para_1354", "para_1355", "para_1356", "para_1357", "para_1358", "para_1359", "para_1360", "para_1361", "para_1362", "para_1363", "para_1364", "para_1365", "para_1366", "para_1367", "para_1368", "para_1369", "para_1370", "para_1371", "para_1372", "para_1373", "para_1374", "para_1375", "para_1376", "para_1377", "para_1378", "para_1379", "para_1380", "para_1381", "para_1382", "para_1383", "para_1384", "para_1385" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1386", "para_1387", "para_1388", "para_1389", "para_1390", "para_1391", "para_1392", "para_1393", "para_1394", "para_1395", "para_1396", "para_1397", "para_1398", "para_1399", "para_1400", "para_1401", "para_1402", "para_1403", "para_1404", "para_1405", "para_1406", "para_1407", "para_1408", "para_1409", "para_1410", "para_1411", "para_1412", "para_1413", "para_1414", "para_1415", "para_1416", "para_1417", "para_1418", "para_1419", "para_1420", "para_1421", "para_1422", "para_1423", "para_1424", "para_1425", "para_1426", "para_1427", "para_1428", "para_1429" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1430", "para_1431", "para_1432", "para_1433", "para_1434", "para_1435", "para_1436", "para_1437", "para_1438", "para_1439", "para_1440", "para_1441", "para_1442", "para_1443", "para_1444", "para_1445", "para_1446", "para_1447", "para_1448", "para_1449", "para_1450", "para_1451", "para_1452", "para_1453", "para_1454", "para_1455", "para_1456", "para_1457", "para_1458", "para_1459", "para_1460", "para_1461", "para_1462", "para_1463", "para_1464", "para_1465", "para_1466", "para_1467", "para_1468", "para_1469", "para_1470", "para_1471", "para_1472", "para_1473" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1474", "para_1475", "para_1476", "para_1477", "para_1478", "para_1479", "para_1480", "para_1481", "para_1482", "para_1483", "para_1484", "para_1485", "para_1486", "para_1487", "para_1488", "para_1489", "para_1490", "para_1491", "para_1492", "para_1493", "para_1494", "para_1495", "para_1496", "para_1497", "para_1498", "para_1499", "para_1500", "para_1501", "para_1502", "para_1503", "para_1504", "para_1505", "para_1506", "para_1507", "para_1508", "para_1509", "para_1510", "para_1511", "para_1512", "para_1513", "para_1514", "para_1515", "para_1516", "para_1517" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1518", "para_1519", "para_1520", "para_1521", "para_1522", "para_1523", "para_1524", "para_1525", "para_1526", "para_1527", "para_1528", "para_1529", "para_1530", "para_1531", "para_1532", "para_1533", "para_1534", "para_1535", "para_1536", "para_1537", "para_1538", "para_1539", "para_1540", "para_1541", "para_1542", "para_1543", "para_1544", "para_1545", "para_1546", "para_1547", "para_1548", "para_1549", "para_1550", "para_1551", "para_1552", "para_1553", "para_1554", "para_1555", "para_1556", "para_1557", "para_1558", "para_1559", "para_1560", "para_1561" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1562", "para_1563", "para_1564", "para_1565", "para_1566", "para_1567", "para_1568", "para_1569", "para_1570", "para_1571", "para_1572", "para_1573", "para_1574", "para_1575", "para_1576", "para_1577", "para_1578", "para_1579", "para_1580", "para_1581", "para_1582", "para_1583", "para_1584", "para_1585", "para_1586", "para_1587", "para_1588", "para_1589", "para_1590", "para_1591", "para_1592", "para_1593", "para_1594", "para_1595", "para_1596", "para_1597", "para_1598", "para_1599", "para_1600", "para_1601", "para_1602", "para_1603", "para_1604", "para_1605" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1606", "para_1607", "para_1608", "para_1609", "para_1610", "para_1611", "para_1612", "para_1613", "para_1614", "para_1615", "para_1616", "para_1617", "para_1618", "para_1619", "para_1620", "para_1621", "para_1622", "para_1623", "para_1624", "para_1625", "para_1626", "para_1627", "para_1628", "para_1629", "para_1630", "para_1631", "para_1632", "para_1633", "para_1634", "para_1635", "para_1636", "para_1637", "para_1638", "para_1639", "para_1640", "para_1641", "para_1642", "para_1643", "para_1644", "para_1645", "para_1646", "para_1647", "para_1648", "para_1649" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1650", "para_1651", "para_1652", "para_1653", "para_1654", "para_1655", "para_1656", "para_1657", "para_1658", "para_1659", "para_1660", "para_1661", "para_1662", "para_1663", "para_1664", "para_1665", "para_1666", "para_1667", "para_1668", "para_1669", "para_1670", "para_1671", "para_1672", "para_1673", "para_1674", "para_1675", "para_1676", "para_1677", "para_1678", "para_1679", "para_1680", "para_1681", "para_1682", "para_1683", "para_1684", "para_1685", "para_1686", "para_1687", "para_1688", "para_1689", "para_1690", "para_1691", "para_1692", "para_1693" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1694", "para_1695", "para_1696", "para_1697", "para_1698", "para_1699", "para_1700", "para_1701", "para_1702", "para_1703", "para_1704", "para_1705", "para_1706", "para_1707", "para_1708", "para_1709", "para_1710", "para_1711", "para_1712", "para_1713", "para_1714", "para_1715", "para_1716", "para_1717", "para_1718", "para_1719", "para_1720", "para_1721", "para_1722", "para_1723", "para_1724", "para_1725", "para_1726", "para_1727", "para_1728", "para_1729", "para_1730", "para_1731", "para_1732", "para_1733", "para_1734", "para_1735", "para_1736" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1737", "para_1738", "para_1739", "para_1740", "para_1741", "para_1742", "para_1743", "para_1744", "para_1745", "para_1746", "para_1747", "para_1748", "para_1749", "para_1750", "para_1751", "para_1752", "para_1753", "para_1754", "para_1755", "para_1756", "para_1757", "para_1758", "para_1759", "para_1760", "para_1761", "para_1762", "para_1763", "para_1764", "para_1765", "para_1766", "para_1767", "para_1768", "para_1769", "para_1770", "para_1771", "para_1772", "para_1773", "para_1774", "para_1775", "para_1776", "para_1777", "para_1778" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1779", "para_1780", "para_1781", "para_1782", "para_1783", "para_1784", "para_1785", "para_1786", "para_1787", "para_1788", "para_1789", "para_1790", "para_1791", "para_1792", "para_1793", "para_1794", "para_1795", "para_1796", "para_1797", "para_1798", "para_1799", "para_1800", "para_1801", "para_1802" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "The district court accordingly addressed the admissibility of these", "paragraphs": [ "para_1803", "para_1804", "para_1805", "para_1806", "para_1807", "para_1808", "para_1809", "para_1810", "para_1811", "para_1812", "para_1813", "para_1814", "para_1815", "para_1816", "para_1817", "para_1818", "para_1819", "para_1820", "para_1821", "para_1822" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1823", "para_1824", "para_1825", "para_1826", "para_1827", "para_1828", "para_1829", "para_1830", "para_1831", "para_1832", "para_1833", "para_1834", "para_1835", "para_1836", "para_1837", "para_1838", "para_1839", "para_1840", "para_1841", "para_1842", "para_1843", "para_1844", "para_1845", "para_1846", "para_1847", "para_1848", "para_1849", "para_1850", "para_1851", "para_1852", "para_1853", "para_1854", "para_1855", "para_1856", "para_1857", "para_1858", "para_1859", "para_1860", "para_1861", "para_1862", "para_1863", "para_1864", "para_1865", "para_1866" ], "kind": "assessment" }, { "title": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraphs": [ "para_1867", "para_1868", "para_1869", "para_1870", "para_1871", "para_1872", "para_1873", "para_1874", "para_1875", "para_1876", "para_1877", "para_1878", "para_1879", "para_1880" ], "kind": "assessment" } ], "paragraphs": [ { "text": "This opinion is subject to revision before final", "paragraph_id": "para_1" }, { "text": "publication in the Pacific Reporter", "paragraph_id": "para_2" }, { "text": "2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_3" }, { "text": "IN THE", "paragraph_id": "para_4" }, { "text": "SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH", "paragraph_id": "para_5" }, { "text": "STATE OF UTAH,", "paragraph_id": "para_6" }, { "text": "Appellee,", "paragraph_id": "para_7" }, { "text": "v.", "paragraph_id": "para_8" }, { "text": "ARTHUR WAYNE NAJERA,", "paragraph_id": "para_9" }, { "text": "Appellant.", "paragraph_id": "para_10" }, { "text": "No. 20230983", "paragraph_id": "para_11" }, { "text": "Heard February 28, 2025", "paragraph_id": "para_12" }, { "text": "Filed November 28, 2025", "paragraph_id": "para_13" }, { "text": "On Appeal of Interlocutory Order", "paragraph_id": "para_14" }, { "text": "Third District Court, Salt Lake County", "paragraph_id": "para_15" }, { "text": "The Honorable Vernice S. Trease", "paragraph_id": "para_16" }, { "text": "No. 211902117", "paragraph_id": "para_17" }, { "text": "Attorneys:", "paragraph_id": "para_18" }, { "text": "Derek E. Brown, Att’y Gen., Daniel W. Boyer, Asst. Solic. Gen.,", "paragraph_id": "para_19" }, { "text": "Salt Lake City, for appellee", "paragraph_id": "para_20" }, { "text": "Sarah J. Carlquist, Salt Lake City, for appellant", "paragraph_id": "para_21" }, { "text": "JUSTICE HAGEN authored the opinion of the Court, in which", "paragraph_id": "para_22" }, { "text": "CHIEF JUSTICE DURRANT, ASSOCIATE CHIEF JUSTICE PEARCE,", "paragraph_id": "para_23" }, { "text": "JUSTICE PETERSEN, and JUSTICE POHLMAN joined.", "paragraph_id": "para_24" }, { "text": "JUSTICE HAGEN, opinion of the Court:", "paragraph_id": "para_25" }, { "text": "INTRODUCTION", "paragraph_id": "para_26" }, { "text": "¶1 In the early morning hours, a woman walked into an", "paragraph_id": "para_27" }, { "text": "emergency room and said that she had been raped. While the", "paragraph_id": "para_28" }, { "text": "woman was waiting to be seen in an exam room, an officer arrived", "paragraph_id": "para_29" }, { "text": "to “get the basic information” to assess the situation and report", "paragraph_id": "para_30" }, { "text": "back to his supervisor. Over the course of the twenty-minute", "paragraph_id": "para_31" }, { "text": "encounter that followed, the officer asked the woman only three", "paragraph_id": "para_32" }, { "text": "substantive questions about the incident: where it happened, if she", "paragraph_id": "para_33" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_34" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_35" }, { "text": "2", "paragraph_id": "para_36" }, { "text": "knew who did it, and if she had a description of the perpetrator.", "paragraph_id": "para_37", "court_paragraph": 2 }, { "text": "While attempting to answer the officer’s questions, the woman", "paragraph_id": "para_38" }, { "text": "volunteered additional details about the assault. She appeared to", "paragraph_id": "para_39" }, { "text": "be thinking aloud as she struggled to recall and process what had", "paragraph_id": "para_40" }, { "text": "just happened to her. As memories would surface, she would gasp,", "paragraph_id": "para_41" }, { "text": "gag, dry heave, cry, hide her face, and tell herself this could not be", "paragraph_id": "para_42" }, { "text": "happening to her.", "paragraph_id": "para_43" }, { "text": "¶2 After the officer left, the woman was examined by a Sexual", "paragraph_id": "para_44" }, { "text": "Assault Nurse Examiner, or SANE. To avoid subjecting sexual", "paragraph_id": "para_45" }, { "text": "assault victims to multiple examinations, SANEs are nurses trained", "paragraph_id": "para_46" }, { "text": "to provide medical care to victims while simultaneously", "paragraph_id": "para_47" }, { "text": "documenting injuries and collecting evidence for later use by law", "paragraph_id": "para_48" }, { "text": "enforcement. The nurse explained to the woman that she would be", "paragraph_id": "para_49" }, { "text": "doing a head-to-toe exam looking for any injuries and would", "paragraph_id": "para_50" }, { "text": "provide medical treatment as necessary. She explained that she", "paragraph_id": "para_51" }, { "text": "would begin by asking some questions to help guide the exam.", "paragraph_id": "para_52" }, { "text": "During the exam, the woman made additional statements about", "paragraph_id": "para_53" }, { "text": "what had occurred during the assault. The nurse documented the", "paragraph_id": "para_54" }, { "text": "statements in a standard sexual assault examination report, which", "paragraph_id": "para_55" }, { "text": "was provided to law enforcement.", "paragraph_id": "para_56" }, { "text": "¶3 The State arrested Arthur Wayne Najera and charged him", "paragraph_id": "para_57" }, { "text": "with one count of aggravated kidnapping and six counts of", "paragraph_id": "para_58" }, { "text": "aggravated assault based on the woman’s allegations. The woman", "paragraph_id": "para_59" }, { "text": "later passed away from causes unrelated to the assault.", "paragraph_id": "para_60" }, { "text": "¶4 Because the woman was no longer available to testify at", "paragraph_id": "para_61" }, { "text": "trial, the State filed motions in limine to admit the statements the", "paragraph_id": "para_62" }, { "text": "woman had made to both the officer and the nurse. Najera opposed", "paragraph_id": "para_63" }, { "text": "the motions, arguing that admission of the woman’s statements", "paragraph_id": "para_64" }, { "text": "would violate his rights under the Sixth Amendment’s", "paragraph_id": "para_65" }, { "text": "Confrontation Clause and the rule against hearsay. The district", "paragraph_id": "para_66" }, { "text": "court held several evidentiary hearings and ultimately granted the", "paragraph_id": "para_67" }, { "text": "State’s motions, admitting the statements that the woman made to", "paragraph_id": "para_68" }, { "text": "both the officer and the nurse. Najera then filed a petition for", "paragraph_id": "para_69" }, { "text": "interlocutory appeal, which this court granted.", "paragraph_id": "para_70" }, { "text": "¶5 We conclude that the woman’s statements to the officer are", "paragraph_id": "para_71" }, { "text": "admissible. The Confrontation Clause prohibits the admission of", "paragraph_id": "para_72" }, { "text": "out-of-court statements that are testimonial, meaning that the", "paragraph_id": "para_73" }, { "text": "statements were elicited for the primary purpose of establishing or", "paragraph_id": "para_74" }, { "text": "proving past events for use in a later criminal prosecution. The", "paragraph_id": "para_75" }, { "text": "encounter between the woman and the officer bore little", "paragraph_id": "para_76" }, { "text": "resemblance to a police interview designed to record a witness’s", "paragraph_id": "para_77" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_78" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_79" }, { "text": "3", "paragraph_id": "para_80" }, { "text": "statement as evidence for trial. The woman was in the emergency", "paragraph_id": "para_81", "court_paragraph": 3 }, { "text": "room awaiting medical care, and the officer made only initial", "paragraph_id": "para_82" }, { "text": "inquires to assess the situation and determine whether a violent", "paragraph_id": "para_83" }, { "text": "suspect was in the immediate area. The use of the woman’s", "paragraph_id": "para_84" }, { "text": "statements at trial is not the type of inquisitorial practice that the", "paragraph_id": "para_85" }, { "text": "Confrontation Clause forbids.", "paragraph_id": "para_86" }, { "text": "¶6 The woman’s statements to the officer are also admissible", "paragraph_id": "para_87" }, { "text": "under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule. The", "paragraph_id": "para_88" }, { "text": "exception allows the use of out-of-court statements made about a", "paragraph_id": "para_89" }, { "text": "startling event while the declarant is under the stress or excitement", "paragraph_id": "para_90" }, { "text": "of the event. Such statements are deemed reliable because the", "paragraph_id": "para_91" }, { "text": "declarant’s heightened state of emotional arousal reduces the", "paragraph_id": "para_92" }, { "text": "capacity for reflective thought and makes it more likely that the", "paragraph_id": "para_93" }, { "text": "statement sprang from the declarant’s memory without being", "paragraph_id": "para_94" }, { "text": "changed or distorted. The woman’s statements to the officer were", "paragraph_id": "para_95" }, { "text": "largely spontaneous and made under the stress of excitement", "paragraph_id": "para_96" }, { "text": "caused by the assault. The account unfolded as a stream of", "paragraph_id": "para_97" }, { "text": "consciousness, suggesting that the woman was recalling her", "paragraph_id": "para_98" }, { "text": "memories in real time. Her physical reactions to the memories as", "paragraph_id": "para_99" }, { "text": "they surfaced not only demonstrated that she was still under the", "paragraph_id": "para_100" }, { "text": "stress of the event, but also that she had not had an opportunity to", "paragraph_id": "para_101" }, { "text": "reflect on what had happened. Even when her voice was calm, her", "paragraph_id": "para_102" }, { "text": "flat affect appeared to reflect shock or denial rather than the", "paragraph_id": "para_103" }, { "text": "capacity for reflective thought. Based on the video of the woman’s", "paragraph_id": "para_104" }, { "text": "interaction with the officer, the district court acted within its", "paragraph_id": "para_105" }, { "text": "discretion in ruling that the woman’s statements are admissible as", "paragraph_id": "para_106" }, { "text": "excited utterances.", "paragraph_id": "para_107" }, { "text": "¶7 We also conclude that the woman’s statements to the nurse", "paragraph_id": "para_108" }, { "text": "are admissible. A SANE examination, by its very nature, has mixed", "paragraph_id": "para_109" }, { "text": "purposes of providing medical care and collecting and preserving", "paragraph_id": "para_110" }, { "text": "evidence for a possible prosecution. We do not adopt a categorical", "paragraph_id": "para_111" }, { "text": "rule regarding the testimonial nature of statements made during", "paragraph_id": "para_112" }, { "text": "SANE examinations, but the specific circumstances presented here", "paragraph_id": "para_113" }, { "text": "demonstrate that the primary purpose of eliciting the woman’s", "paragraph_id": "para_114" }, { "text": "statements was to provide care. The woman had gone to the", "paragraph_id": "para_115" }, { "text": "emergency room immediately after the assault and had not yet", "paragraph_id": "para_116" }, { "text": "been treated. Although the nurse was documenting the woman’s", "paragraph_id": "para_117" }, { "text": "answers on a form approved by the Department of Public Safety,", "paragraph_id": "para_118" }, { "text": "no law enforcement was present during the exam or directing", "paragraph_id": "para_119" }, { "text": "questioning. The nurse explained to the woman that she would be", "paragraph_id": "para_120" }, { "text": "doing a physical examination and providing any needed medical", "paragraph_id": "para_121" }, { "text": "treatment and that the questions she asked would be used to guide", "paragraph_id": "para_122" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_123" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_124" }, { "text": "4", "paragraph_id": "para_125" }, { "text": "the exam. And although the form completed during the", "paragraph_id": "para_126", "court_paragraph": 4 }, { "text": "examination was provided to law enforcement, the nurse testified", "paragraph_id": "para_127" }, { "text": "that gathering a history was standard medical practice and would", "paragraph_id": "para_128" }, { "text": "be documented in any medical chart. Under these circumstances,", "paragraph_id": "para_129" }, { "text": "the primary purpose of asking about the assault was not to gather", "paragraph_id": "para_130" }, { "text": "evidence for use at trial, but to properly treat a woman in need of", "paragraph_id": "para_131" }, { "text": "medical care. Therefore, the admission of these statements does not", "paragraph_id": "para_132" }, { "text": "violate the Confrontation Clause.", "paragraph_id": "para_133" }, { "text": "¶8 Finally, the district court acted within its discretion in", "paragraph_id": "para_134" }, { "text": "admitting the woman’s statements to the nurse under the medical", "paragraph_id": "para_135" }, { "text": "diagnosis or treatment exception to the hearsay rule. The court", "paragraph_id": "para_136" }, { "text": "credited the nurse’s testimony that there was a medical reason for", "paragraph_id": "para_137" }, { "text": "asking nearly every question listed on the form. Because Najera", "paragraph_id": "para_138" }, { "text": "objected to the admission of the woman’s statements in their", "paragraph_id": "para_139" }, { "text": "entirety, the district court considered the statements as a whole and", "paragraph_id": "para_140" }, { "text": "did not parse whether particular statements might be unrelated to", "paragraph_id": "para_141" }, { "text": "a medical purpose. The district court did not abuse its discretion in", "paragraph_id": "para_142" }, { "text": "ruling that the statements are generally admissible. Najera retains", "paragraph_id": "para_143" }, { "text": "the right to raise specific objections to individual statements offered", "paragraph_id": "para_144" }, { "text": "at trial.", "paragraph_id": "para_145" }, { "text": "BACKGROUND1", "paragraph_id": "para_146" }, { "text": "¶9 On August 29, 2020, at 1:48 a.m., Beth2 walked into an", "paragraph_id": "para_147" }, { "text": "emergency room and said she had been raped at about 1:00 a.m. in", "paragraph_id": "para_148" }, { "text": "a nearby parking lot area. Beth was placed in a hospital room.", "paragraph_id": "para_149" }, { "text": "During her hospital visit, Beth spoke with both a police officer and", "paragraph_id": "para_150" }, { "text": "a sexual assault nurse examiner.", "paragraph_id": "para_151" }, { "text": "Statements to the Officer3", "paragraph_id": "para_152" }, { "text": "¶10 Beth was waiting in the hospital room when the officer", "paragraph_id": "para_153" }, { "text": "walked in, just after 2:30 a.m. As he walked in, Beth was sitting on", "paragraph_id": "para_154" }, { "text": "__________________________________________________________", "paragraph_id": "para_155" }, { "text": "1 “On interlocutory review, we recount the facts as alleged and", "paragraph_id": "para_156" }, { "text": "in a light most favorable to the ruling below.” State v. Stewart, 2018", "paragraph_id": "para_157" }, { "text": "UT 24, ¶ 2 n.1, 438 P.3d 515 (cleaned up). We emphasize that the", "paragraph_id": "para_158" }, { "text": "allegations against Najera have not been proved and he is", "paragraph_id": "para_159" }, { "text": "presumed innocent. See State v. Jolley, 2025 UT 9, n.1, 568 P.3d 1040.", "paragraph_id": "para_160" }, { "text": "2 A pseudonym.", "paragraph_id": "para_161" }, { "text": "3 The record includes body camera footage from the officer of", "paragraph_id": "para_162" }, { "text": "his interview with Beth. Our summary of the interview is based on", "paragraph_id": "para_163" }, { "text": "a review of that footage.", "paragraph_id": "para_164" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_165" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_166" }, { "text": "5", "paragraph_id": "para_167" }, { "text": "the edge of the bed crying and fidgeting, looking away from the", "paragraph_id": "para_168", "court_paragraph": 5 }, { "text": "door, and saying, “I don’t want to.” The officer introduced himself", "paragraph_id": "para_169" }, { "text": "and asked if she wanted to talk with him. She said that she did", "paragraph_id": "para_170" }, { "text": "because she did not “want what ha-happened to [her] to . . . .” She", "paragraph_id": "para_171" }, { "text": "trailed off, then began speaking again saying, “. . . thinking that", "paragraph_id": "para_172" }, { "text": "he’s out there . . . .” She then trailed off again. As the officer pulled", "paragraph_id": "para_173" }, { "text": "out his notebook and began to speak, Beth blurted out, “I know I", "paragraph_id": "para_174" }, { "text": "was raped. I’ll just tell you that right now.”", "paragraph_id": "para_175" }, { "text": "¶11 The officer explained that he would ask some questions", "paragraph_id": "para_176" }, { "text": "that would “be a little invasive.” Beth responded, “Please. Please", "paragraph_id": "para_177" }, { "text": "do.” She then fanned her face and put her head in her hands as he", "paragraph_id": "para_178" }, { "text": "explained his plan. The officer said he would “get the basic", "paragraph_id": "para_179" }, { "text": "information” and then “call [his] supervisor from there.” Choked", "paragraph_id": "para_180" }, { "text": "up and sniffling, she said “okay” with her head still in her hands.", "paragraph_id": "para_181" }, { "text": "¶12 Beth responded to the officer’s questions about her", "paragraph_id": "para_182" }, { "text": "personal information such as name and date of birth. Then the", "paragraph_id": "para_183" }, { "text": "officer asked, “And where did it occur at, the incident?” She", "paragraph_id": "para_184" }, { "text": "answered pointing to her right, “Right here in the parking lot.” He", "paragraph_id": "para_185" }, { "text": "asked, “In the hospital parking lot?” She nodded saying, “Right", "paragraph_id": "para_186" }, { "text": "here. I think [inaudible]. I think so ‘cause I didn’t walk that far . . .", "paragraph_id": "para_187" }, { "text": "through these emergency room doors.”", "paragraph_id": "para_188" }, { "text": "¶13 The officer then asked, “Do you know who it was?” Beth", "paragraph_id": "para_189" }, { "text": "said, “No, sir. I don’t. I don’t. I think . . . I’m trying to remember", "paragraph_id": "para_190" }, { "text": "what he . . .” before she trailed off again. Sitting cross-legged on the", "paragraph_id": "para_191" }, { "text": "hospital bed, she put her head in her hands and began to cry. The", "paragraph_id": "para_192" }, { "text": "officer reassured her and told her to take the time she needed.", "paragraph_id": "para_193" }, { "text": "Continuing to cry with her head in her hands, she muttered “oh", "paragraph_id": "para_194" }, { "text": "please,” “please,” and “please help me father.” The officer asked,", "paragraph_id": "para_195" }, { "text": "“Do you have a—do you know a description?” Without looking at", "paragraph_id": "para_196" }, { "text": "the officer, Beth continued to mumble what sounded like a prayer", "paragraph_id": "para_197" }, { "text": "before abruptly raising her head to “tell [him] the story.”", "paragraph_id": "para_198" }, { "text": "¶14 Unprompted, Beth recalled the events leading up to the", "paragraph_id": "para_199" }, { "text": "alleged rape, periodically breaking down crying before continuing.", "paragraph_id": "para_200" }, { "text": "She explained that she had been riding home with a friend when", "paragraph_id": "para_201" }, { "text": "they got into a heated argument, and the friend told her to get out", "paragraph_id": "para_202" }, { "text": "of the car. Beth walked to the nearest bus stop where she sat and", "paragraph_id": "para_203" }, { "text": "tried to contact her son. A young man pulled “up on a bike,” asked", "paragraph_id": "para_204" }, { "text": "if she was doing okay, and said he would help her get home. Beth", "paragraph_id": "para_205" }, { "text": "and the young man got on the bus together and began riding it", "paragraph_id": "para_206" }, { "text": "closer to her home. She explained that she was “crying and stuff”", "paragraph_id": "para_207" }, { "text": "on the bus, and a man who boarded at a stop not too far from the", "paragraph_id": "para_208" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_209" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_210" }, { "text": "6", "paragraph_id": "para_211" }, { "text": "hospital asked, “What’s wrong with her?” The young man", "paragraph_id": "para_212", "court_paragraph": 6 }, { "text": "explained that her friend had left her, and she was “kind of", "paragraph_id": "para_213" }, { "text": "suicidal.” Beth volunteered to the officer that she had recently lost", "paragraph_id": "para_214" }, { "text": "her husband, that she had attempted suicide several times, and that", "paragraph_id": "para_215" }, { "text": "she had experienced suicidal thoughts that night.", "paragraph_id": "para_216" }, { "text": "¶15 Beth put her head in her hand for a minute and then", "paragraph_id": "para_217" }, { "text": "paused as if remembering something. She dropped her voice and", "paragraph_id": "para_218" }, { "text": "said, pointing to her right, “I guess the bus driver stopped out here", "paragraph_id": "para_219" }, { "text": "in front of [the hospital].” She remembered that the man who had", "paragraph_id": "para_220" }, { "text": "recently boarded said, “Well this is close to my stop so I’ll just make", "paragraph_id": "para_221" }, { "text": "sure she gets in there.” Beth said she and the man got off the bus", "paragraph_id": "para_222" }, { "text": "together.", "paragraph_id": "para_223" }, { "text": "¶16 Beth recalled that the man was Hispanic, and she stood up", "paragraph_id": "para_224" }, { "text": "and gestured that the man was a “little bit shorter” than her. The", "paragraph_id": "para_225" }, { "text": "officer asked Beth how tall she was, which she answered. Without", "paragraph_id": "para_226" }, { "text": "prompting, Beth described the man’s clothing and shaved head.", "paragraph_id": "para_227" }, { "text": "Then staring at the floor she said, “I remember . . .” before burying", "paragraph_id": "para_228" }, { "text": "her face in her hands. The officer assured her she was okay. She", "paragraph_id": "para_229" }, { "text": "again said, “I remember . . .” and lay down on the bed. Beth slowly", "paragraph_id": "para_230" }, { "text": "opened and closed her eyes as if thinking deeply with her hands up", "paragraph_id": "para_231" }, { "text": "at her sides as if preparing to speak. She suddenly gasped and", "paragraph_id": "para_232" }, { "text": "brought her hands to her mouth. She then began waving her hands", "paragraph_id": "para_233" }, { "text": "in front of her face and sat up. Bending over, she began to dry", "paragraph_id": "para_234" }, { "text": "heave.", "paragraph_id": "para_235" }, { "text": "¶17 With wide eyes, she straightened up and took a number of", "paragraph_id": "para_236" }, { "text": "deep breaths. Through tears, she tried to speak several times before", "paragraph_id": "para_237" }, { "text": "managing to say, “Oh my god.” She began breathing rapidly,", "paragraph_id": "para_238" }, { "text": "waving her hand in front of her face, and saying progressively", "paragraph_id": "para_239" }, { "text": "louder, “This isn’t me. This isn’t supposed to happen to me. Do you", "paragraph_id": "para_240" }, { "text": "understand? This isn’t supposed to happen to me.”", "paragraph_id": "para_241" }, { "text": "¶18 Composing herself a bit, she said, “I remember him trying", "paragraph_id": "para_242" }, { "text": "to put his penis in my—not trying, he was . . . he was forcing his", "paragraph_id": "para_243" }, { "text": "penis in my mouth and like gagging me.” As she spoke those", "paragraph_id": "para_244" }, { "text": "words, she gasped at times, cried, and nodded as if confirming her", "paragraph_id": "para_245" }, { "text": "memory of the events. She said she remembered a tattoo, then", "paragraph_id": "para_246" }, { "text": "shook her head with her eyes wide and sunk her head into her", "paragraph_id": "para_247" }, { "text": "hands again. She mumbled before repeatedly saying, “This isn’t", "paragraph_id": "para_248" }, { "text": "supposed to happen.” She stood up from the bed still repeating the", "paragraph_id": "para_249" }, { "text": "phrase while shaking her hands rapidly at her sides as if trying to", "paragraph_id": "para_250" }, { "text": "rid them of something. She moved to the corner, placed her head", "paragraph_id": "para_251" }, { "text": "against the wall, and repeated, “This isn’t me. This isn’t me.” She", "paragraph_id": "para_252" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_253" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_254" }, { "text": "7", "paragraph_id": "para_255" }, { "text": "then turned, took a breath, and said, “He had a . . . .” She shook her", "paragraph_id": "para_256", "court_paragraph": 7 }, { "text": "head and said, “I know I have to do this. I know I do. I know I do.”", "paragraph_id": "para_257" }, { "text": "She then noticed she had debris in her hair. Shaking her hands", "paragraph_id": "para_258" }, { "text": "again, Beth lamented, “I’m dirty. This is disgusting. This isn’t me.”", "paragraph_id": "para_259" }, { "text": "She clenched her hands into fists and cried into them saying, “Oh", "paragraph_id": "para_260" }, { "text": "my god. I just want to take a shower.” The officer said, “I know.”", "paragraph_id": "para_261" }, { "text": "¶19 Beth returned to the assailant’s tattoo, explaining that she", "paragraph_id": "para_262" }, { "text": "had seen a circular tattoo around his bellybutton as he forced his", "paragraph_id": "para_263" }, { "text": "penis in her mouth. She recalled seeing tattoos on his arm as well.", "paragraph_id": "para_264" }, { "text": "As she described what she saw, she would stare at the floor, pause,", "paragraph_id": "para_265" }, { "text": "and nod before continuing as if just remembering or reliving the", "paragraph_id": "para_266" }, { "text": "experience. She began crying, shaking her hands, and pacing again", "paragraph_id": "para_267" }, { "text": "before returning to the corner of the room and bending over facing", "paragraph_id": "para_268" }, { "text": "the wall. She then turned, leaned up against the wall in the corner,", "paragraph_id": "para_269" }, { "text": "wrapped her arms around herself with a shocked look on her face", "paragraph_id": "para_270" }, { "text": "while saying, “Oh, please. Oh, please.”", "paragraph_id": "para_271" }, { "text": "¶20 After taking a moment, she looked away and said, as if to", "paragraph_id": "para_272" }, { "text": "herself, “This isn’t supposed to happen to somebody like me. This", "paragraph_id": "para_273" }, { "text": "isn’t . . . this isn’t supposed to happen.” She started to walk toward", "paragraph_id": "para_274" }, { "text": "the bed and then bent over crying. The officer told her to take her", "paragraph_id": "para_275" }, { "text": "time. She paused, then suddenly stood up straight, staring into the", "paragraph_id": "para_276" }, { "text": "distance, and blurted out the name of the young man who had", "paragraph_id": "para_277" }, { "text": "initially helped her.", "paragraph_id": "para_278" }, { "text": "¶21 She sat down on the bed and continued recalling events", "paragraph_id": "para_279" }, { "text": "with a glazed look on her face. She explained that after they got off", "paragraph_id": "para_280" }, { "text": "the bus at the hospital, she told the man she was thirsty, and he", "paragraph_id": "para_281" }, { "text": "gave her “what [she] thought was a bottle of water.” Her sentences", "paragraph_id": "para_282" }, { "text": "became more fractured as she began to cry. The officer asked who", "paragraph_id": "para_283" }, { "text": "gave her the bottle of water and whether it was the young man she", "paragraph_id": "para_284" }, { "text": "had just named. She said that it was not, but rather it was the man", "paragraph_id": "para_285" }, { "text": "who had raped her. She said that he gave her a drink, and she", "paragraph_id": "para_286" }, { "text": "remembered feeling “just not righ . . . ,” but before finishing the last", "paragraph_id": "para_287" }, { "text": "word, she insisted that she did not do drugs and only drank", "paragraph_id": "para_288" }, { "text": "occasionally. Then she began wiping off the bedsheet saying it was", "paragraph_id": "para_289" }, { "text": "“disgusting.” She stood up and backed away beginning to cry,", "paragraph_id": "para_290" }, { "text": "shaking her hands, and hiding in a different corner of the room", "paragraph_id": "para_291" }, { "text": "while saying, “I don’t like it. I don’t like it ’cause it’s not me.” She", "paragraph_id": "para_292" }, { "text": "stood in the corner crying, offering what sounded like a prayer to", "paragraph_id": "para_293" }, { "text": "“Heavenly Father” and pleading, “Please just help me get through", "paragraph_id": "para_294" }, { "text": "this.”", "paragraph_id": "para_295" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_296" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_297" }, { "text": "8", "paragraph_id": "para_298" }, { "text": "¶22 The officer explained that he was going to call his", "paragraph_id": "para_299", "court_paragraph": 8 }, { "text": "supervisor but would like to ask one more question “if that was", "paragraph_id": "para_300" }, { "text": "okay.” He asked, “Was that what he did and then you came here", "paragraph_id": "para_301" }, { "text": "right afterwards?” She explained that she had been between two", "paragraph_id": "para_302" }, { "text": "buildings “right here,” pointing to her left. She said there was “like", "paragraph_id": "para_303" }, { "text": "a security light” but at first it was dark. Beth looked to her side and", "paragraph_id": "para_304" }, { "text": "said, “I remember him dragging me by my legs” as she mimed the", "paragraph_id": "para_305" }, { "text": "action. Looking into the distance, she said she remembered “being", "paragraph_id": "para_306" }, { "text": "on grass and it was cold and it was wet.” Pointing to her left again,", "paragraph_id": "para_307" }, { "text": "she said, “And I think it was right here. If I stepped outside, I could", "paragraph_id": "para_308" }, { "text": "guarantee you if it was or not.” Contemplating for a moment, she", "paragraph_id": "para_309" }, { "text": "said she could not remember her pants, socks, or shoes coming off.", "paragraph_id": "para_310" }, { "text": "But she did remember that “a little while later” she said she had to", "paragraph_id": "para_311" }, { "text": "go, to which the man responded, “No, babe. No, babe. No, babe", "paragraph_id": "para_312" }, { "text": ". . . . You’re not gonna to leave this cock hangin’.”", "paragraph_id": "para_313" }, { "text": "¶23 As soon as she repeated those words to the officer, she", "paragraph_id": "para_314" }, { "text": "appeared overwhelmed and began bending over and standing up", "paragraph_id": "para_315" }, { "text": "while saying phrases like, “Oh god!” and “Please just help me.” She", "paragraph_id": "para_316" }, { "text": "again repeated what the man said to her before abruptly stating", "paragraph_id": "para_317" }, { "text": "that she had lost a necklace from her husband. Holding her hands", "paragraph_id": "para_318" }, { "text": "out, Beth told the officer she also remembered the man sucking on", "paragraph_id": "para_319" }, { "text": "her finger trying to take off her rings, claiming he could get good", "paragraph_id": "para_320" }, { "text": "money for them. She begged him not to take one that belonged to", "paragraph_id": "para_321" }, { "text": "her husband. Looking to her side, Beth said, “And then I just", "paragraph_id": "para_322" }, { "text": "remember trying to find my pants.” She began to choke up, saying,", "paragraph_id": "para_323" }, { "text": "“I have no underwear on. I don’t know where my underwear are. I", "paragraph_id": "para_324" }, { "text": "couldn’t find them.”", "paragraph_id": "para_325" }, { "text": "¶24 Beth then returned to answering the officer’s question", "paragraph_id": "para_326" }, { "text": "about timing. She said that, after putting on her shoes, she", "paragraph_id": "para_327" }, { "text": "“stumbl[ed]” to the hospital while the man yelled after her. She", "paragraph_id": "para_328" }, { "text": "said she “came right to [the] room” where she and the officer were", "paragraph_id": "para_329" }, { "text": "standing and that she had started to cry saying she needed help.", "paragraph_id": "para_330" }, { "text": "She explained that she knew something had happened because her", "paragraph_id": "para_331" }, { "text": "vaginal area was “burning” and she had not been allowed to use", "paragraph_id": "para_332" }, { "text": "the restroom yet. The officer asked her to repeat what she had said", "paragraph_id": "para_333" }, { "text": "about pain, then he excused himself, saying he thought he “ha[d]", "paragraph_id": "para_334" }, { "text": "enough right now.”", "paragraph_id": "para_335" }, { "text": "Statements to the Nurse", "paragraph_id": "para_336" }, { "text": "¶25 At 3:18 a.m., about an hour and a half after Beth entered", "paragraph_id": "para_337" }, { "text": "the hospital, the nurse started to examine her. The nurse began the", "paragraph_id": "para_338" }, { "text": "examination according to protocol with an introduction and", "paragraph_id": "para_339" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_340" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_341" }, { "text": "9", "paragraph_id": "para_342" }, { "text": "explanation of the exam, which she described as “just a head to toe,", "paragraph_id": "para_343", "court_paragraph": 9 }, { "text": "to look for any injuries and be able to address any injuries [Beth]", "paragraph_id": "para_344" }, { "text": "might have.” She also explained that she would begin with “some", "paragraph_id": "para_345" }, { "text": "questions [to] help guide [the] exam” and then “treat with", "paragraph_id": "para_346" }, { "text": "medications or do x-rays or anything that might seem necessary", "paragraph_id": "para_347" }, { "text": "towards the end.”", "paragraph_id": "para_348" }, { "text": "¶26 During the exam, the nurse completed a standard sexual", "paragraph_id": "para_349" }, { "text": "assault examination form electronically in Utah’s forensic medical", "paragraph_id": "para_350" }, { "text": "record database. The report form used by SANEs was developed", "paragraph_id": "para_351" }, { "text": "by various stakeholders, including the Utah Department of Public", "paragraph_id": "para_352" }, { "text": "Safety, SANEs, the forensic laboratory, and the Utah Coalition", "paragraph_id": "para_353" }, { "text": "Against Sexual Assault. Reports in the database are accessible by", "paragraph_id": "para_354" }, { "text": "SANEs and law enforcement but not by the hospitals (or the", "paragraph_id": "para_355" }, { "text": "doctors) that provide care to the individual.", "paragraph_id": "para_356" }, { "text": "¶27 The report began with Beth’s basic personal information,", "paragraph_id": "para_357" }, { "text": "such as her name, date of birth, and medical history, as well as both", "paragraph_id": "para_358" }, { "text": "a law enforcement and a rape kit number. The report then included", "paragraph_id": "para_359" }, { "text": "a summary of the assault transcribed by the nurse, including direct", "paragraph_id": "para_360" }, { "text": "quotes from Beth. Beth’s explanation of the events leading up to the", "paragraph_id": "para_361" }, { "text": "alleged rape matched her description to the officer, including the", "paragraph_id": "para_362" }, { "text": "fight with her friend and bus ride. She again explained that after", "paragraph_id": "para_363" }, { "text": "getting off the bus, a man gave her a water bottle and that after", "paragraph_id": "para_364" }, { "text": "drinking it, she “started feeling weird and tired.” She emphasized", "paragraph_id": "para_365" }, { "text": "several times that it was “really dark” and her “head hurt” before", "paragraph_id": "para_366" }, { "text": "the man “grabbed” her by her hair. Beth said she “remember[ed]", "paragraph_id": "para_367" }, { "text": "an arm wrapped around [her] chest and he was pulling” her. She", "paragraph_id": "para_368" }, { "text": "again explained the security light coming on and said she could not", "paragraph_id": "para_369" }, { "text": "see his face because he moved away from the light. Beth generally", "paragraph_id": "para_370" }, { "text": "gave the same description of his clothing and mentioned that he", "paragraph_id": "para_371" }, { "text": "had a tattoo.", "paragraph_id": "para_372" }, { "text": "¶28 She told the nurse that “[h]e tried to cram his penis in [her]", "paragraph_id": "para_373" }, { "text": "mouth,” and she “remember[ed] he started pulling [her] jeans", "paragraph_id": "para_374" }, { "text": "down.” Beth said she told the man, “Please no!” and tried to hold", "paragraph_id": "para_375" }, { "text": "her knees together. She said that the man put his mouth on her", "paragraph_id": "para_376" }, { "text": "vagina, pushed her legs behind her, and tried to put his penis in", "paragraph_id": "para_377" }, { "text": "her anus but was unsuccessful.", "paragraph_id": "para_378" }, { "text": "¶29 Beth said she tried to get up and he punched her. She", "paragraph_id": "para_379" }, { "text": "explained that he tried to take her boots off and was “getting mad”", "paragraph_id": "para_380" }, { "text": "so she took her boots off for him. She described him taking her", "paragraph_id": "para_381" }, { "text": "pants partially off and removing her socks. Beth said he “started", "paragraph_id": "para_382" }, { "text": "fingering [her] and us[ing] his fist,” which “hurt so bad.” At this", "paragraph_id": "para_383" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_384" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_385" }, { "text": "10", "paragraph_id": "para_386" }, { "text": "point, she said he got behind her and it got dark again. Beth told", "paragraph_id": "para_387", "court_paragraph": 10 }, { "text": "the nurse that the man tore her underwear off and “penetrated", "paragraph_id": "para_388" }, { "text": "[her] vagina from behind.” She described the man wanting to", "paragraph_id": "para_389" }, { "text": "“finish in [her] mouth,” but “[a]fter awhile” he said, “I just want to", "paragraph_id": "para_390" }, { "text": "finish.” While “[h]e was playing with himself,” Beth got herself", "paragraph_id": "para_391" }, { "text": "dressed and “ran to [the] hospital.”", "paragraph_id": "para_392" }, { "text": "¶30 The next few sections of the report consisted primarily of", "paragraph_id": "para_393" }, { "text": "yes or no questions and brief descriptions. Beth specified that the", "paragraph_id": "para_394" }, { "text": "man was a stranger to her, that she bit him on the neck, that he", "paragraph_id": "para_395" }, { "text": "made verbal threats to her, that he slammed her against a brick wall", "paragraph_id": "para_396" }, { "text": "and grabbed her by the hair, that he hit her on the side of the head,", "paragraph_id": "para_397" }, { "text": "and that he choked her. The report noted that the man’s penis and", "paragraph_id": "para_398" }, { "text": "finger/hand contacted Beth’s genitals and anus, and that his penis", "paragraph_id": "para_399" }, { "text": "contacted her mouth. The nurse indicated that the man’s mouth", "paragraph_id": "para_400" }, { "text": "contacted Beth’s genitals, breasts, mouth, and neck. The report also", "paragraph_id": "para_401" }, { "text": "included notes about Beth’s actions after the assault (i.e., using the", "paragraph_id": "para_402" }, { "text": "bathroom, showering, eating, or brushing teeth).", "paragraph_id": "para_403" }, { "text": "¶31 In the report, the nurse described Beth’s demeanor", "paragraph_id": "para_404" }, { "text": "throughout the exam. The nurse explained that, upon entering the", "paragraph_id": "para_405" }, { "text": "room, Beth was pacing, crying, gagging, and “breathing very", "paragraph_id": "para_406" }, { "text": "rapidly and shallowly.” The nurse said Beth dry heaved in the toilet", "paragraph_id": "para_407" }, { "text": "for about two minutes. During her questioning of Beth, the nurse", "paragraph_id": "para_408" }, { "text": "said Beth “spoke in a quavering voice and continued to cry.”", "paragraph_id": "para_409" }, { "text": "During the genital exam, she said Beth “winced and cried.” And", "paragraph_id": "para_410" }, { "text": "while receiving her discharge instructions, the nurse described", "paragraph_id": "para_411" }, { "text": "Beth crying but noted that her breathing and speech had slowed to", "paragraph_id": "para_412" }, { "text": "a normal pace.", "paragraph_id": "para_413" }, { "text": "¶32 The next ten pages of the report included charts and", "paragraph_id": "para_414" }, { "text": "diagrams of various body parts. The nurse made note of any cuts,", "paragraph_id": "para_415" }, { "text": "bruises, or other abnormalities she found during her physical", "paragraph_id": "para_416" }, { "text": "examination of Beth. The injuries described included abrasions on", "paragraph_id": "para_417" }, { "text": "her chin, lower lip, and buttocks as well as bruises on her cheek,", "paragraph_id": "para_418" }, { "text": "arm, thighs, knee, upper back, buttocks, and between her breasts.", "paragraph_id": "para_419" }, { "text": "The anogenital exam showed numerous abrasions and bruising in", "paragraph_id": "para_420" }, { "text": "addition to swelling surrounding Beth’s anus.", "paragraph_id": "para_421" }, { "text": "¶33 The report next noted the laboratory and forensic", "paragraph_id": "para_422" }, { "text": "specimens collected during the exam, including blood and urine", "paragraph_id": "para_423" }, { "text": "samples, numerous swabs, debris from Beth’s hair, her clothing,", "paragraph_id": "para_424" }, { "text": "and anal/genital photographs. The nurse also indicated", "paragraph_id": "para_425" }, { "text": "medications that the hospital staff gave Beth. The nurse completed", "paragraph_id": "para_426" }, { "text": "the exam at 7:29 a.m.", "paragraph_id": "para_427" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_428" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_429" }, { "text": "11", "paragraph_id": "para_430" }, { "text": "¶34 The nurse also completed a strangulation report. The", "paragraph_id": "para_431", "court_paragraph": 11 }, { "text": "report began with questions about the nature of the assault (i.e.,", "paragraph_id": "para_432" }, { "text": "how much pressure was applied and where, length of the", "paragraph_id": "para_433" }, { "text": "strangulation, and whether it happened more than once). Beth said", "paragraph_id": "para_434" }, { "text": "that the man strangled her face-to-face around her entire neck for", "paragraph_id": "para_435" }, { "text": "“a couple of seconds” three to four times. On a scale of one to ten,", "paragraph_id": "para_436" }, { "text": "Beth rated the level of pressure applied a ten though she said the", "paragraph_id": "para_437" }, { "text": "pressure was not consistent. When asked if she was shaken or if her", "paragraph_id": "para_438" }, { "text": "head hit anything, she said her head hit a wall.", "paragraph_id": "para_439" }, { "text": "¶35 The report then moved to questions focused on Beth’s", "paragraph_id": "para_440" }, { "text": "thoughts and her interactions with the man (i.e., what she thought", "paragraph_id": "para_441" }, { "text": "was going to happen, the level of fear she experienced, whether the", "paragraph_id": "para_442" }, { "text": "man said anything, what the man’s demeanor was like, and how", "paragraph_id": "para_443" }, { "text": "the assault ended). Beth said, “I thought I would die.” She", "paragraph_id": "para_444" }, { "text": "explained that the man had a smirk on his face and said, “This", "paragraph_id": "para_445" }, { "text": "should make you orgasm better.” She said it ended when she", "paragraph_id": "para_446" }, { "text": "begged him to stop.", "paragraph_id": "para_447" }, { "text": "¶36 The report concluded with questions centered on Beth’s", "paragraph_id": "para_448" }, { "text": "physical condition (i.e., breathing abnormalities, loss of", "paragraph_id": "para_449" }, { "text": "consciousness, changes in vision or hearing, and any ongoing", "paragraph_id": "para_450" }, { "text": "pain). Beth said that during the strangulation she was unable to", "paragraph_id": "para_451" }, { "text": "breathe for a couple seconds, her vision was fuzzy, she was", "paragraph_id": "para_452" }, { "text": "lightheaded, had a headache, and her throat was sore. The only", "paragraph_id": "para_453" }, { "text": "ongoing symptom was a sore throat. The nurse also noted the", "paragraph_id": "para_454" }, { "text": "abrasions to her chin and lip as well as the bruise on her cheek.", "paragraph_id": "para_455" }, { "text": "District Court Proceedings", "paragraph_id": "para_456" }, { "text": "¶37 Several months later, the State charged Najera with one", "paragraph_id": "para_457" }, { "text": "count of aggravated kidnapping and six counts of aggravated", "paragraph_id": "para_458" }, { "text": "assault after a swab the nurse took from Beth’s breast matched his", "paragraph_id": "para_459" }, { "text": "profile in a DNA database. Police later confirmed the match with a", "paragraph_id": "para_460" }, { "text": "buccal swab from Najera. Following a preliminary hearing, at", "paragraph_id": "para_461" }, { "text": "which Beth did not testify, Najera was bound over for trial on all", "paragraph_id": "para_462" }, { "text": "charges.", "paragraph_id": "para_463" }, { "text": "¶38 Before trial, Beth passed away from causes unrelated to the", "paragraph_id": "para_464" }, { "text": "assault. The State filed motions in limine to admit the statements", "paragraph_id": "para_465" }, { "text": "Beth made to both the officer and the nurse. The State argued that", "paragraph_id": "para_466" }, { "text": "both sets of statements were nontestimonial and were admissible", "paragraph_id": "para_467" }, { "text": "hearsay under the excited utterance exception. See UTAH R. EVID.", "paragraph_id": "para_468" }, { "text": "803(2). Additionally, the State contended that a second exception to", "paragraph_id": "para_469" }, { "text": "hearsay applied to Beth’s statements to the nurse because she made", "paragraph_id": "para_470" }, { "text": "them for medical diagnosis or treatment. See id. R. 803(4).", "paragraph_id": "para_471" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_472" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_473" }, { "text": "12", "paragraph_id": "para_474" }, { "text": "¶39 The district court held several evidentiary hearings.", "paragraph_id": "para_475", "court_paragraph": 12 }, { "text": "Among a number of witnesses and experts, the court heard", "paragraph_id": "para_476" }, { "text": "testimony from the officer and the nurse. While the officer was on", "paragraph_id": "para_477" }, { "text": "the stand, the State played the video of the officer’s interview with", "paragraph_id": "para_478" }, { "text": "Beth while periodically pausing the footage to ask questions. After", "paragraph_id": "para_479" }, { "text": "playing the first few minutes, the State asked the officer what Beth’s", "paragraph_id": "para_480" }, { "text": "demeanor was upon “making [his] initial contact” with her. The", "paragraph_id": "para_481" }, { "text": "officer responded that Beth was “upset, crying, and seemed a little", "paragraph_id": "para_482" }, { "text": "confused.” At a later pause of the video, the officer said that it", "paragraph_id": "para_483" }, { "text": "seemed Beth “was trying to remember things and work through", "paragraph_id": "para_484" }, { "text": "things as she was telling [him] the story.” He explained that her", "paragraph_id": "para_485" }, { "text": "demeanor appeared “upset, really—can’t believe-it-happened kind", "paragraph_id": "para_486" }, { "text": "of situation.”", "paragraph_id": "para_487" }, { "text": "¶40 The State also asked if the officer had any safety concerns", "paragraph_id": "para_488" }, { "text": "after the first few moments of their conversation. The officer", "paragraph_id": "para_489" }, { "text": "responded, “I had concerns that in that general area there was a", "paragraph_id": "para_490" }, { "text": "suspect out that just committed a sex offense.” Based on Beth’s", "paragraph_id": "para_491" }, { "text": "statement that the assault occurred in the parking lot and she", "paragraph_id": "para_492" }, { "text": "“didn’t walk far” to get to the hospital, the officer was worried that", "paragraph_id": "para_493" }, { "text": "the sexual assault suspect was at large in the general area and", "paragraph_id": "para_494" }, { "text": "“could continue to do it to other people who were out at that time.”", "paragraph_id": "para_495" }, { "text": "He explained that he asked Beth for a description of her attacker so", "paragraph_id": "para_496" }, { "text": "that he could provide it to detectives to help with the case “or if the", "paragraph_id": "para_497" }, { "text": "person [was] still out there nearby, we might be able to locate", "paragraph_id": "para_498" }, { "text": "them.” He said at that point in the investigation he believed the", "paragraph_id": "para_499" }, { "text": "person was near the hospital and possibly a threat to the public.", "paragraph_id": "para_500" }, { "text": "¶41 The court also heard testimony from the nurse and", "paragraph_id": "para_501" }, { "text": "received both her sexual assault examination report and", "paragraph_id": "para_502" }, { "text": "strangulation report. The nurse testified that the “mission” of a", "paragraph_id": "para_503" }, { "text": "SANE is to “medically support patients who have reported", "paragraph_id": "para_504" }, { "text": "violence—physical assault, sexual assault.” She described the", "paragraph_id": "para_505" }, { "text": "forensic aspect of the exam as “a courtesy” that SANEs provide to", "paragraph_id": "para_506" }, { "text": "patients and law enforcement “while . . . doing a medical exam” so", "paragraph_id": "para_507" }, { "text": "that the “patient doesn’t have to go through all of that a second", "paragraph_id": "para_508" }, { "text": "time.” She explained that SANEs do the “same things” that an", "paragraph_id": "para_509" }, { "text": "emergency doctor would be doing in these situations—and what", "paragraph_id": "para_510" }, { "text": "doctors did in fact do before SANEs offered these services.", "paragraph_id": "para_511" }, { "text": "¶42 The State then asked the nurse about each section of her", "paragraph_id": "para_512" }, { "text": "report and how, or if, it was related to Beth’s medical diagnosis or", "paragraph_id": "para_513" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_514" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_515" }, { "text": "13", "paragraph_id": "para_516" }, { "text": "treatment.4 The nurse explained that certain information on the", "paragraph_id": "para_517", "court_paragraph": 13 }, { "text": "first page of the report—the date and time of the exam as well as", "paragraph_id": "para_518" }, { "text": "the patient’s date of birth, age, complaint, and medical history—is", "paragraph_id": "para_519" }, { "text": "relevant to medical diagnosis or treatment because a nurse would", "paragraph_id": "para_520" }, { "text": "note that information “with any chart.” The nurse also explained", "paragraph_id": "para_521" }, { "text": "that the date, time, location, and summary of the assault are", "paragraph_id": "para_522" }, { "text": "relevant to medical diagnosis or treatment because it helps the", "paragraph_id": "para_523" }, { "text": "nurse assess “the injuries” and whether the patient is in the", "paragraph_id": "para_524" }, { "text": "“window” for certain medications, namely “antibiotics” and", "paragraph_id": "para_525" }, { "text": "“pregnancy prophylaxis.” The nurse then explained that whether", "paragraph_id": "para_526" }, { "text": "the perpetrator was a stranger or a partner is “important” to", "paragraph_id": "para_527" }, { "text": "medical diagnosis or treatment for “multiple reasons” because a", "paragraph_id": "para_528" }, { "text": "patient could contract a “sexually transmitted infection[]” from a", "paragraph_id": "para_529" }, { "text": "stranger or “if she lives with that person, it could be a safety issue.”", "paragraph_id": "para_530" }, { "text": "The nurse next explained that the patient’s actions and the", "paragraph_id": "para_531" }, { "text": "suspect’s actions are relevant to medical diagnosis or treatment", "paragraph_id": "para_532" }, { "text": "because they can explain “injury” and “trauma.” With respect to", "paragraph_id": "para_533" }, { "text": "indicators of drug-facilitated sexual assault, the nurse explained", "paragraph_id": "para_534" }, { "text": "that it is “important to know . . . what kind of drugs could be in her", "paragraph_id": "para_535" }, { "text": "system and address her health that way, if needed.” And for the", "paragraph_id": "para_536" }, { "text": "history in the strangulation report, the nurse explained that it was", "paragraph_id": "para_537" }, { "text": "relevant to medical diagnosis or treatment because strangulation", "paragraph_id": "para_538" }, { "text": "“can be life-threatening” and she needs to “know how severe it", "paragraph_id": "para_539" }, { "text": "was” so that the physician can order a “CAT scan” if necessary.", "paragraph_id": "para_540" }, { "text": "¶43 Additionally, the court heard testimony from a SANE", "paragraph_id": "para_541" }, { "text": "expert called by the defense. The expert had been “a forensic nurse", "paragraph_id": "para_542" }, { "text": "for about 30 years” and “direct[ed] the nurses on a forensic nursing", "paragraph_id": "para_543" }, { "text": "team.” She testified that the objectives of a SANE exam “are to", "paragraph_id": "para_544" }, { "text": "provide nursing care, identify injury, collect evidence, provide", "paragraph_id": "para_545" }, { "text": "follow-up services, refer for further assessment by a healthcare", "paragraph_id": "para_546" }, { "text": "provider if necessary, and to complete documentation.” But she", "paragraph_id": "para_547" }, { "text": "disagreed with the nurse’s statement that a forensic nurse collects", "paragraph_id": "para_548" }, { "text": "evidence merely as a courtesy for law enforcement, explaining that", "paragraph_id": "para_549" }, { "text": "a SANE is “not called unless a crime has been alleged” and “there", "paragraph_id": "para_550" }, { "text": "is a law enforcement investigation that has been opened.” She", "paragraph_id": "para_551" }, { "text": "__________________________________________________________", "paragraph_id": "para_552" }, { "text": "4 The State did not ask the nurse about the “Describe Subject’s", "paragraph_id": "para_553" }, { "text": "Dress During Assault” or “Post Assault Actions by Patient”", "paragraph_id": "para_554" }, { "text": "sections of the report. The State explained to the district court that", "paragraph_id": "para_555" }, { "text": "it was “not trying to get in the suspect’s dress.” And it further", "paragraph_id": "para_556" }, { "text": "explained that the “State is not arguing at this time that . . . post", "paragraph_id": "para_557" }, { "text": "assault actions by patients . . . fall under the rule.”", "paragraph_id": "para_558" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_559" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_560" }, { "text": "14", "paragraph_id": "para_561" }, { "text": "explained the origins of Utah’s sexual assault examination report", "paragraph_id": "para_562", "court_paragraph": 14 }, { "text": "and that completed reports are only accessible by SANEs and", "paragraph_id": "para_563" }, { "text": "investigative officers. She testified that law enforcement officers are", "paragraph_id": "para_564" }, { "text": "generally not present in the room during SANE exams, but that", "paragraph_id": "para_565" }, { "text": "when physical evidence is collected, law enforcement will be called", "paragraph_id": "para_566" }, { "text": "to collect it immediately.", "paragraph_id": "para_567" }, { "text": "¶44 After considering all the evidence, the district court", "paragraph_id": "para_568" }, { "text": "granted the State’s motions and admitted the statements that Beth", "paragraph_id": "para_569" }, { "text": "made to both the officer and the nurse. Concerning Beth’s", "paragraph_id": "para_570" }, { "text": "statements to the officer, the court reasoned that “the primary", "paragraph_id": "para_571" }, { "text": "purpose of the statements . . . was not for establishing or proving", "paragraph_id": "para_572" }, { "text": "events potentially related to a later criminal prosecution.” Instead,", "paragraph_id": "para_573" }, { "text": "the court ruled that “[w]hen the circumstances at the time of the", "paragraph_id": "para_574" }, { "text": "statements by [Beth] are viewed objectively, the primary purpose", "paragraph_id": "para_575" }, { "text": ". . . was to enable [the officer] to contact his supervisor and to enable", "paragraph_id": "para_576" }, { "text": "the police’s apprehension of a perpetrator of an alleged sexual", "paragraph_id": "para_577" }, { "text": "assault.” The district court concluded that most of Beth’s", "paragraph_id": "para_578" }, { "text": "statements to the officer were admissible under the excited", "paragraph_id": "para_579" }, { "text": "utterance exception to the rule against hearsay because the", "paragraph_id": "para_580" }, { "text": "statements related to a startling event and “were made while the", "paragraph_id": "para_581" }, { "text": "declarant was under the stress and excitement caused by the event", "paragraph_id": "para_582" }, { "text": "or condition.” But the court recognized that certain statements", "paragraph_id": "para_583" }, { "text": "were inadmissible because they were “not related to the alleged", "paragraph_id": "para_584" }, { "text": "sexual assault, such as statements regarding her husband’s death", "paragraph_id": "para_585" }, { "text": "and her prior attempted suicides.”", "paragraph_id": "para_586" }, { "text": "¶45 Concerning Beth’s statements to the nurse, the district", "paragraph_id": "para_587" }, { "text": "court analyzed their admissibility as a whole because “[d]efense", "paragraph_id": "para_588" }, { "text": "counsel objected generally and not specifically to individual", "paragraph_id": "para_589" }, { "text": "statements in the SANE report.” The court determined that the", "paragraph_id": "para_590" }, { "text": "“primary purpose of the SANE examination and report [was] for", "paragraph_id": "para_591" }, { "text": "the purposes of diagnosis and treatment,” and therefore the", "paragraph_id": "para_592" }, { "text": "statements were not testimonial for purposes of the Confrontation", "paragraph_id": "para_593" }, { "text": "Clause and were admissible under the medical diagnosis or", "paragraph_id": "para_594" }, { "text": "treatment exception to the rule against hearsay.", "paragraph_id": "para_595" }, { "text": "¶46 Najera then filed a petition for interlocutory appeal, which", "paragraph_id": "para_596" }, { "text": "this court granted. We have jurisdiction under Utah Code", "paragraph_id": "para_597" }, { "text": "subsection 78A-3-102(3)(h).", "paragraph_id": "para_598" }, { "text": "ISSUES AND STANDARDS OF REVIEW", "paragraph_id": "para_599" }, { "text": "¶47 Najera raises two issues in his interlocutory appeal. First,", "paragraph_id": "para_600" }, { "text": "Najera argues that the district court erred in ruling that Beth’s", "paragraph_id": "para_601" }, { "text": "statements to both the officer and the nurse are nontestimonial and", "paragraph_id": "para_602" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_603" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_604" }, { "text": "15", "paragraph_id": "para_605" }, { "text": "therefore do not implicate the Confrontation Clause. We review a", "paragraph_id": "para_606", "court_paragraph": 15 }, { "text": "district court’s decision to admit testimony that may implicate the", "paragraph_id": "para_607" }, { "text": "Confrontation Clause for correctness. State v. Poole, 2010 UT 25, ¶ 8,", "paragraph_id": "para_608" }, { "text": "232 P.3d 519.", "paragraph_id": "para_609" }, { "text": "¶48 Second, Najera argues that the district court erred when it", "paragraph_id": "para_610" }, { "text": "allowed the State to introduce those same statements as admissible", "paragraph_id": "para_611" }, { "text": "hearsay. When reviewing a district court’s ruling on hearsay", "paragraph_id": "para_612" }, { "text": "evidence, we review the legal questions required “to make the", "paragraph_id": "para_613" }, { "text": "determination of admissibility for correctness,” “the questions of", "paragraph_id": "para_614" }, { "text": "fact for clear error,” and the “ruling on admissibility for abuse of", "paragraph_id": "para_615" }, { "text": "discretion.” State v. Workman, 2005 UT 66, ¶ 10, 122 P.3d 639.", "paragraph_id": "para_616" }, { "text": "ANALYSIS", "paragraph_id": "para_617" }, { "text": "¶49 The Confrontation Clause, found in the Sixth Amendment", "paragraph_id": "para_618" }, { "text": "of the United States Constitution, grants all criminal defendants the", "paragraph_id": "para_619" }, { "text": "right “to be confronted with the witnesses against” them. U.S.", "paragraph_id": "para_620" }, { "text": "CONST. amend. VI. “[T]his bedrock procedural guarantee applies to", "paragraph_id": "para_621" }, { "text": "both federal and state prosecutions.” Crawford v. Washington, 541", "paragraph_id": "para_622" }, { "text": "U.S. 36, 42 (2004).", "paragraph_id": "para_623" }, { "text": "¶50 In Crawford, the United States Supreme Court examined", "paragraph_id": "para_624" }, { "text": "the historical underpinnings of the Confrontation Clause. The", "paragraph_id": "para_625" }, { "text": "Court noted founding-era concerns with inquisitorial practices of", "paragraph_id": "para_626" }, { "text": "some civil-law pretrial examination procedures. See id. at 47–50.", "paragraph_id": "para_627" }, { "text": "Those practices included “routinely [taking] testimony by", "paragraph_id": "para_628" }, { "text": "deposition or private judicial examination.” Id. at 47–48. The", "paragraph_id": "para_629" }, { "text": "statements given by witnesses during these pretrial examinations", "paragraph_id": "para_630" }, { "text": "were then read aloud in court as a replacement for live testimony.", "paragraph_id": "para_631" }, { "text": "Id. at 43. By not calling the witness to testify, the accused was", "paragraph_id": "para_632" }, { "text": "denied an opportunity to test the veracity of the testimony through", "paragraph_id": "para_633" }, { "text": "cross-examination. The Court cited historical evidence suggesting", "paragraph_id": "para_634" }, { "text": "that “the civil-law mode of criminal procedure, and particularly its", "paragraph_id": "para_635" }, { "text": "use of ex parte examinations as evidence against the accused,” was", "paragraph_id": "para_636" }, { "text": "“the principal evil at which the Confrontation Clause was", "paragraph_id": "para_637" }, { "text": "directed.” Id. at 50.", "paragraph_id": "para_638" }, { "text": "¶51 Before Crawford, it had been generally accepted that the", "paragraph_id": "para_639" }, { "text": "Confrontation Clause guaranteed only a right to cross-examine", "paragraph_id": "para_640" }, { "text": "witnesses at trial and that the admissibility of pretrial statements", "paragraph_id": "para_641" }, { "text": "was governed entirely by hearsay rules. But the Court rejected that", "paragraph_id": "para_642" }, { "text": "view: “Leaving the regulation of out-of-court statements to the law", "paragraph_id": "para_643" }, { "text": "of evidence would render the Confrontation Clause powerless to", "paragraph_id": "para_644" }, { "text": "prevent even the most flagrant inquisitorial practices.” Id. at 51.", "paragraph_id": "para_645" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_646" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_647" }, { "text": "16", "paragraph_id": "para_648" }, { "text": "¶52 Still, the Court recognized that “not all hearsay implicates", "paragraph_id": "para_649", "court_paragraph": 16 }, { "text": "the Sixth Amendment’s core concerns.” Id. The Court distinguished", "paragraph_id": "para_650" }, { "text": "between “testimonial statements,” to which the confrontation right", "paragraph_id": "para_651" }, { "text": "applies, and nontestimonial statements, subject only to traditional", "paragraph_id": "para_652" }, { "text": "hearsay rules. Id. The Court asserted that the distinction was rooted", "paragraph_id": "para_653" }, { "text": "not only in the history but also in the text of the Confrontation", "paragraph_id": "para_654" }, { "text": "Clause itself. Id. The Clause, it explained, “applies to witnesses", "paragraph_id": "para_655" }, { "text": "against the accused—in other words, those who bear testimony.”", "paragraph_id": "para_656" }, { "text": "Id. (cleaned up). And “testimony . . . is typically a solemn", "paragraph_id": "para_657" }, { "text": "declaration or affirmation made for the purpose of establishing or", "paragraph_id": "para_658" }, { "text": "proving some fact.” Id. (cleaned up). Thus, the Court reasoned, “an", "paragraph_id": "para_659" }, { "text": "accuser who makes a formal statement to government officers", "paragraph_id": "para_660" }, { "text": "bears testimony in a sense that a person who makes a casual remark", "paragraph_id": "para_661" }, { "text": "to an acquaintance does not.” Id. (cleaned up). Because the latter", "paragraph_id": "para_662" }, { "text": "hearsay “bears little resemblance to the civil-law abuses the", "paragraph_id": "para_663" }, { "text": "Confrontation Clause targeted,” id., its admissibility turns on", "paragraph_id": "para_664" }, { "text": "whether it is deemed sufficiently reliable under our rules of", "paragraph_id": "para_665" }, { "text": "evidence. “On the other hand, ex parte examinations might", "paragraph_id": "para_666" }, { "text": "sometimes be admissible under modern hearsay rules, but the", "paragraph_id": "para_667" }, { "text": "Framers certainly would not have condoned them.” Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_668" }, { "text": "¶53 Post-Crawford, determining the admissibility of out-of-", "paragraph_id": "para_669" }, { "text": "court statements is a two-step process. “Where testimonial", "paragraph_id": "para_670" }, { "text": "evidence is at issue, . . . the Sixth Amendment demands what the", "paragraph_id": "para_671" }, { "text": "common law required: unavailability and a prior opportunity for", "paragraph_id": "para_672" }, { "text": "cross-examination.” Id. at 68. Otherwise, the admission of", "paragraph_id": "para_673" }, { "text": "testimonial statements at trial violates a defendant’s constitutional", "paragraph_id": "para_674" }, { "text": "right to confrontation. But where nontestimonial hearsay is at issue,", "paragraph_id": "para_675" }, { "text": "the rules of evidence govern whether the statements are admissible.", "paragraph_id": "para_676" }, { "text": "Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_677" }, { "text": "¶54 The Crawford Court declined to adopt a precise definition", "paragraph_id": "para_678" }, { "text": "of “testimonial statements.” Id. But it held that “[w]hatever else the", "paragraph_id": "para_679" }, { "text": "term covers, it applies at a minimum to prior testimony at a", "paragraph_id": "para_680" }, { "text": "preliminary hearing, before a grand jury, or at a former trial; and", "paragraph_id": "para_681" }, { "text": "to police interrogations.” Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_682" }, { "text": "¶55 Later decisions have held that whether a given statement", "paragraph_id": "para_683" }, { "text": "is testimonial or nontestimonial depends on the primary purpose", "paragraph_id": "para_684" }, { "text": "of the statement. See generally Ohio v. Clark, 576 U.S. 237 (2015).", "paragraph_id": "para_685" }, { "text": "Statements are testimonial if “the primary purpose of the", "paragraph_id": "para_686" }, { "text": "interrogation is to establish or prove past events potentially", "paragraph_id": "para_687" }, { "text": "relevant to later criminal prosecution.” Id. at 244 (cleaned up). But", "paragraph_id": "para_688" }, { "text": "if the primary purpose of the exchange “is not to create a record for", "paragraph_id": "para_689" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_690" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_691" }, { "text": "17", "paragraph_id": "para_692" }, { "text": "trial,” the resulting statements are “not within the scope of the", "paragraph_id": "para_693", "court_paragraph": 17 }, { "text": "Confrontation Clause.” Id. (cleaned up). In determining primary", "paragraph_id": "para_694" }, { "text": "purpose, courts “must consider all of the relevant circumstances.”", "paragraph_id": "para_695" }, { "text": "Id. (cleaned up). “In the end, the question is whether, in light of all", "paragraph_id": "para_696" }, { "text": "the circumstances, viewed objectively, the primary purpose of the", "paragraph_id": "para_697" }, { "text": "conversation was to create an out-of-court substitute for trial", "paragraph_id": "para_698" }, { "text": "testimony.” Id. at 245 (cleaned up).", "paragraph_id": "para_699" }, { "text": "¶56 In this case, Najera has challenged the admissibility of two", "paragraph_id": "para_700" }, { "text": "sets of out-of-court statements that Beth made on the night of the", "paragraph_id": "para_701" }, { "text": "alleged assault—statements first to the officer and later to the", "paragraph_id": "para_702" }, { "text": "nurse. We will begin by addressing Beth’s statements to the officer", "paragraph_id": "para_703" }, { "text": "before turning to those she made to the nurse. For each set of", "paragraph_id": "para_704" }, { "text": "statements, we apply the framework established in Crawford by", "paragraph_id": "para_705" }, { "text": "first determining whether the statements are testimonial and must", "paragraph_id": "para_706" }, { "text": "be excluded under the Confrontation Clause. If the statements are", "paragraph_id": "para_707" }, { "text": "nontestimonial, we then analyze whether those statements are", "paragraph_id": "para_708" }, { "text": "admissible hearsay under our rules of evidence. For the reasons", "paragraph_id": "para_709" }, { "text": "explained below, we conclude that the statements to both the", "paragraph_id": "para_710" }, { "text": "officer and the nurse are nontestimonial and that the district court", "paragraph_id": "para_711" }, { "text": "acted within its discretion in admitting each set of statements under", "paragraph_id": "para_712" }, { "text": "an exception to the rule against hearsay.", "paragraph_id": "para_713" }, { "text": "I. STATEMENTS TO THE OFFICER", "paragraph_id": "para_714" }, { "text": "¶57 On appeal, Najera argues that the district court erred by", "paragraph_id": "para_715" }, { "text": "determining that the primary purpose of the officer’s interaction", "paragraph_id": "para_716" }, { "text": "with Beth was to address an ongoing emergency, thereby rendering", "paragraph_id": "para_717" }, { "text": "her statements nontestimonial. Najera contends that “the court", "paragraph_id": "para_718" }, { "text": "stretched the notion of an ongoing emergency too far” by treating", "paragraph_id": "para_719" }, { "text": "the entire time a perpetrator is “on the loose” as an emergency. If", "paragraph_id": "para_720" }, { "text": "we reject that argument, Najera argues that the district court also", "paragraph_id": "para_721" }, { "text": "erred when it determined that Beth’s statements to the officer were", "paragraph_id": "para_722" }, { "text": "admissible under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay", "paragraph_id": "para_723" }, { "text": "rule.", "paragraph_id": "para_724" }, { "text": "¶58 We begin with our analysis of whether the statements", "paragraph_id": "para_725" }, { "text": "were testimonial and thus barred by the Confrontation Clause. We", "paragraph_id": "para_726" }, { "text": "conclude that the statements are nontestimonial because, when", "paragraph_id": "para_727" }, { "text": "viewed objectively, the primary purpose of the conversation", "paragraph_id": "para_728" }, { "text": "between Beth and the officer was not to elicit statements for use in", "paragraph_id": "para_729" }, { "text": "a future prosecution. We then turn to the application of our hearsay", "paragraph_id": "para_730" }, { "text": "rules and conclude that the district court did not abuse its", "paragraph_id": "para_731" }, { "text": "discretion in admitting the statements under the excited utterance", "paragraph_id": "para_732" }, { "text": "exception.", "paragraph_id": "para_733" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_734" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_735" }, { "text": "18", "paragraph_id": "para_736" }, { "text": "A. The Admission of Beth’s Statements to the Officer Does Not", "paragraph_id": "para_737", "court_paragraph": 18 }, { "text": "Violate the Confrontation Clause Because the Primary", "paragraph_id": "para_738" }, { "text": "Purpose of the Interaction Was Not To Gather Evidence for", "paragraph_id": "para_739" }, { "text": "Later Prosecution", "paragraph_id": "para_740" }, { "text": "¶59 The district court ruled that the statements Beth made to", "paragraph_id": "para_741" }, { "text": "the officer were nontestimonial because “the primary purpose of", "paragraph_id": "para_742" }, { "text": "talking to [Beth] was not to create an out-of-court-substitute for", "paragraph_id": "para_743" }, { "text": "trial testimony . . . but to address an ongoing emergency.” Najera", "paragraph_id": "para_744" }, { "text": "argues that the district court erred in this determination because", "paragraph_id": "para_745" }, { "text": "“the circumstances surrounding [Beth’s] interview belied the", "paragraph_id": "para_746" }, { "text": "notion that an ongoing emergency existed.”", "paragraph_id": "para_747" }, { "text": "¶60 But the presence of an ongoing emergency is not", "paragraph_id": "para_748" }, { "text": "dispositive; it is just one circumstance in which “a statement is not", "paragraph_id": "para_749" }, { "text": "procured with a primary purpose of creating an out-of-court", "paragraph_id": "para_750" }, { "text": "substitute for trial testimony.” Michigan v. Bryant, 562 U.S. 344, 358", "paragraph_id": "para_751" }, { "text": "(2011).", "paragraph_id": "para_752" }, { "text": "¶61 The concept of a so-called “ongoing emergency exception”", "paragraph_id": "para_753" }, { "text": "to the Confrontation Clause emerged from the United States", "paragraph_id": "para_754" }, { "text": "Supreme Court’s opinion in Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813", "paragraph_id": "para_755" }, { "text": "(2006). That opinion resolved a pair of cases involving domestic", "paragraph_id": "para_756" }, { "text": "violence.", "paragraph_id": "para_757" }, { "text": "¶62 The first case involved the admission of statements made", "paragraph_id": "para_758" }, { "text": "during a 911 call. Id. at 817. The 911 dispatcher received a call, but", "paragraph_id": "para_759" }, { "text": "the caller hung up before saying anything. Id. The dispatcher called", "paragraph_id": "para_760" }, { "text": "back and asked the woman who answered what was going on. The", "paragraph_id": "para_761" }, { "text": "woman responded, “He’s here jumpin’ on me again.” Id. The", "paragraph_id": "para_762" }, { "text": "dispatcher asked about her location and then inquired whether", "paragraph_id": "para_763" }, { "text": "there were any weapons. Id. The woman replied, “No. He’s usin’", "paragraph_id": "para_764" }, { "text": "his fists.” Id. As the dispatcher asked additional questions, the", "paragraph_id": "para_765" }, { "text": "woman provided the man’s name and other identifying", "paragraph_id": "para_766" }, { "text": "information and explained the context of the assault. Id. at 818. The", "paragraph_id": "para_767" }, { "text": "man was arrested and charged, but when the woman failed to show", "paragraph_id": "para_768" }, { "text": "up for trial, the recording of the 911 call was admitted. Id. at 818–", "paragraph_id": "para_769" }, { "text": "19.", "paragraph_id": "para_770" }, { "text": "¶63 The statements in the second case were made to officers at", "paragraph_id": "para_771" }, { "text": "the scene of a domestic disturbance. Id. at 819. When the officers", "paragraph_id": "para_772" }, { "text": "arrived, they first spoke with the wife who was outside. Id. She told", "paragraph_id": "para_773" }, { "text": "them “nothing was the matter” and gave them permission to enter", "paragraph_id": "para_774" }, { "text": "the home. Id. (cleaned up). The officers then spoke with the", "paragraph_id": "para_775" }, { "text": "husband who told them “that he and his wife had been in an", "paragraph_id": "para_776" }, { "text": "argument but everything was fine now and the argument never", "paragraph_id": "para_777" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_778" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_779" }, { "text": "19", "paragraph_id": "para_780" }, { "text": "became physical.” Id. (cleaned up). Some of the officers stayed with", "paragraph_id": "para_781", "court_paragraph": 19 }, { "text": "the husband while others spoke to the wife in a separate room and", "paragraph_id": "para_782" }, { "text": "asked her again about what had happened. Id. After hearing her", "paragraph_id": "para_783" }, { "text": "account, the officers asked her to fill out a battery affidavit in which", "paragraph_id": "para_784" }, { "text": "she accused the husband of domestic violence. Id. at 820. The", "paragraph_id": "para_785" }, { "text": "husband was charged, but the wife did not appear to testify at trial.", "paragraph_id": "para_786" }, { "text": "Id. The court admitted the wife’s affidavit into evidence and", "paragraph_id": "para_787" }, { "text": "allowed an officer to testify about her oral statements. Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_788" }, { "text": "¶64 Both sets of statements were made to law enforcement,", "paragraph_id": "para_789" }, { "text": "and Crawford had been understood to treat such statements as", "paragraph_id": "para_790" }, { "text": "prototypically testimonial. But the Davis Court held that the wife’s", "paragraph_id": "para_791" }, { "text": "statements to the responding officers were testimonial, while the", "paragraph_id": "para_792" }, { "text": "woman’s statements on the 911 call were not. The Court explained,", "paragraph_id": "para_793" }, { "text": "“When we said in Crawford that interrogations by law enforcement", "paragraph_id": "para_794" }, { "text": "officers fall squarely within the class of testimonial hearsay, we had", "paragraph_id": "para_795" }, { "text": "immediately in mind (for that was the case before us)", "paragraph_id": "para_796" }, { "text": "interrogations solely directed at establishing the facts of a past", "paragraph_id": "para_797" }, { "text": "crime, in order to identify (or provide evidence to convict) the", "paragraph_id": "para_798" }, { "text": "perpetrator.” Id. at 826 (cleaned up). “A 911 call, on the other hand,", "paragraph_id": "para_799" }, { "text": "and at least the initial interrogation conducted in connection with", "paragraph_id": "para_800" }, { "text": "a 911 call, is ordinarily not designed primarily to establish or prove", "paragraph_id": "para_801" }, { "text": "some past fact, but to describe current circumstances requiring", "paragraph_id": "para_802" }, { "text": "police assistance.” Id. at 827 (cleaned up).", "paragraph_id": "para_803" }, { "text": "¶65 The Court determined that the circumstances of the 911", "paragraph_id": "para_804" }, { "text": "call in the first case “objectively indicate its primary purpose was", "paragraph_id": "para_805" }, { "text": "to enable police assistance to meet an ongoing emergency.” Id. at", "paragraph_id": "para_806" }, { "text": "828. The caller “simply was not acting as a witness; she was not", "paragraph_id": "para_807" }, { "text": "testifying.” Id. Therefore, it was not the type of testimonial hearsay", "paragraph_id": "para_808" }, { "text": "prohibited by the Confrontation Clause.", "paragraph_id": "para_809" }, { "text": "¶66 In contrast, the statements of the wife in the second case", "paragraph_id": "para_810" }, { "text": "were statements made “under official interrogation,” which are", "paragraph_id": "para_811" }, { "text": "“inherently testimonial.” Id. at 830. While not made in the context", "paragraph_id": "para_812" }, { "text": "of a formal, stationhouse interrogation, the wife’s statements were", "paragraph_id": "para_813" }, { "text": "similar to those in Crawford in that they “deliberately recounted, in", "paragraph_id": "para_814" }, { "text": "response to police questioning, how potentially criminal past", "paragraph_id": "para_815" }, { "text": "events began and progressed.” Id. “Objectively viewed, the", "paragraph_id": "para_816" }, { "text": "primary, if not indeed the sole, purpose of the interrogation was to", "paragraph_id": "para_817" }, { "text": "investigate a possible crime—which is, of course, precisely what", "paragraph_id": "para_818" }, { "text": "the officer should have done.” Id. Such statements “are an obvious", "paragraph_id": "para_819" }, { "text": "substitute for live testimony, because they do precisely what a", "paragraph_id": "para_820" }, { "text": "witness does on direct examination.” Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_821" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_822" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_823" }, { "text": "20", "paragraph_id": "para_824" }, { "text": "¶67 The Court once again declined to define what would", "paragraph_id": "para_825", "court_paragraph": 20 }, { "text": "constitute a testimonial statement outside the context of the case", "paragraph_id": "para_826" }, { "text": "before it, but said that “it suffices to decide the present cases to hold", "paragraph_id": "para_827" }, { "text": "as follows”:", "paragraph_id": "para_828" }, { "text": "Statements are nontestimonial when made in the", "paragraph_id": "para_829" }, { "text": "course of police interrogation under circumstances", "paragraph_id": "para_830" }, { "text": "objectively indicating that the primary purpose of the", "paragraph_id": "para_831" }, { "text": "interrogation is to enable police assistance to meet an", "paragraph_id": "para_832" }, { "text": "ongoing emergency. They are testimonial when the", "paragraph_id": "para_833" }, { "text": "circumstances objectively indicate that there is no", "paragraph_id": "para_834" }, { "text": "such ongoing emergency, and that the primary", "paragraph_id": "para_835" }, { "text": "purpose of the interrogation is to establish or prove", "paragraph_id": "para_836" }, { "text": "past events potentially relevant to later criminal", "paragraph_id": "para_837" }, { "text": "prosecution.", "paragraph_id": "para_838" }, { "text": "Id. at 822.", "paragraph_id": "para_839" }, { "text": "¶68 That passage from Davis has been misconstrued as", "paragraph_id": "para_840" }, { "text": "creating a “ongoing emergency exception” that must be met before", "paragraph_id": "para_841" }, { "text": "statements to law enforcement can be deemed nontestimonial. But", "paragraph_id": "para_842" }, { "text": "the Davis Court was not “attempting to produce an exhaustive", "paragraph_id": "para_843" }, { "text": "classification of all conceivable statements—or even all conceivable", "paragraph_id": "para_844" }, { "text": "statements in response to police interrogation—as either", "paragraph_id": "para_845" }, { "text": "testimonial or nontestimonial.” Id. It was simply deciding the facts", "paragraph_id": "para_846" }, { "text": "before it. It held that statements are nontestimonial when the", "paragraph_id": "para_847" }, { "text": "primary purpose is something other than establishing facts for a", "paragraph_id": "para_848" }, { "text": "later prosecution. And it expressly declined to limit the", "paragraph_id": "para_849" }, { "text": "circumstances in which statements to law enforcement might be", "paragraph_id": "para_850" }, { "text": "characterized as nontestimonial. See Bryant, 562 U.S. at 355 (“We", "paragraph_id": "para_851" }, { "text": "thus made clear in Davis that not all those questioned by the police", "paragraph_id": "para_852" }, { "text": "are witnesses and not all interrogations by law enforcement officers", "paragraph_id": "para_853" }, { "text": "are subject to the Confrontation Clause.” (cleaned up)).", "paragraph_id": "para_854" }, { "text": "¶69 The Court returned to the subject again in Michigan v.", "paragraph_id": "para_855" }, { "text": "Bryant. In that case, police responded to a call that a man had been", "paragraph_id": "para_856" }, { "text": "shot. Id. at 349. They found the man lying next to his car with a", "paragraph_id": "para_857" }, { "text": "gunshot wound to his stomach, struggling to speak. Id. “The police", "paragraph_id": "para_858" }, { "text": "asked him ‘what had happened, who had shot him, and where the", "paragraph_id": "para_859" }, { "text": "shooting had occurred.’” Id. The man identified the shooter as", "paragraph_id": "para_860" }, { "text": "“Rick” and explained where and how he had been shot. Id. The", "paragraph_id": "para_861" }, { "text": "conversation lasted five to ten minutes before the man was taken to", "paragraph_id": "para_862" }, { "text": "the hospital where he died within hours. Id. Police immediately", "paragraph_id": "para_863" }, { "text": "went to the location of the shooting and found blood and a bullet", "paragraph_id": "para_864" }, { "text": "as well as the wallet of Richard Bryant, the alleged shooter. Id. at", "paragraph_id": "para_865" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_866" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_867" }, { "text": "21", "paragraph_id": "para_868" }, { "text": "350. At trial, the officer who spoke with the dying man testified", "paragraph_id": "para_869", "court_paragraph": 21 }, { "text": "about what the man had told him. Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_870" }, { "text": "¶70 The Court held “that the circumstances of the interaction", "paragraph_id": "para_871" }, { "text": "between [the man] and the police objectively indicate[d] that the", "paragraph_id": "para_872" }, { "text": "primary purpose of the interrogation was to enable police", "paragraph_id": "para_873" }, { "text": "assistance to meet an ongoing emergency” and therefore, the man’s", "paragraph_id": "para_874" }, { "text": "statements were nontestimonial, and their admission at trial did", "paragraph_id": "para_875" }, { "text": "not violate the Confrontation Clause. Id. at 349 (cleaned up). But the", "paragraph_id": "para_876" }, { "text": "Court once again clarified that the existence or absence of an", "paragraph_id": "para_877" }, { "text": "ongoing emergency is not “dispositive of the testimonial inquiry.”", "paragraph_id": "para_878" }, { "text": "Id. at 366. And it emphasized that “whether an ongoing emergency", "paragraph_id": "para_879" }, { "text": "exists is simply one factor—albeit an important factor—that", "paragraph_id": "para_880" }, { "text": "informs the ultimate inquiry regarding the ‘primary purpose’ of an", "paragraph_id": "para_881" }, { "text": "interrogation.” Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_882" }, { "text": "¶71 The takeaway is that the presence of an ongoing", "paragraph_id": "para_883" }, { "text": "emergency does not determine whether statements made to law", "paragraph_id": "para_884" }, { "text": "enforcement are testimonial. The determinative factor is the", "paragraph_id": "para_885" }, { "text": "primary purpose of the questioning. “When, as in Davis, the", "paragraph_id": "para_886" }, { "text": "primary purpose of an interrogation is to respond to an ‘ongoing", "paragraph_id": "para_887" }, { "text": "emergency,’ its purpose is not to create a record for trial and thus", "paragraph_id": "para_888" }, { "text": "is not within the scope of the Clause.” Id. at 358. But that does not", "paragraph_id": "para_889" }, { "text": "mean that all other statements to law enforcement are testimonial.", "paragraph_id": "para_890" }, { "text": "To the contrary, “there may be other circumstances, aside from", "paragraph_id": "para_891" }, { "text": "ongoing emergencies, when a statement is not procured with a", "paragraph_id": "para_892" }, { "text": "primary purpose of creating an out-of-court substitute for trial", "paragraph_id": "para_893" }, { "text": "testimony.” Id. Even statements made during an ongoing", "paragraph_id": "para_894" }, { "text": "emergency will be testimonial if the primary purpose was to collect", "paragraph_id": "para_895" }, { "text": "evidence for trial. And the inverse is also true: the absence of an", "paragraph_id": "para_896" }, { "text": "ongoing emergency does not render statements to law enforcement", "paragraph_id": "para_897" }, { "text": "testimonial if they were not elicited to create a record for trial.", "paragraph_id": "para_898" }, { "text": "¶72 To determine the primary purpose of a police", "paragraph_id": "para_899" }, { "text": "interrogation, courts must “objectively evaluate the", "paragraph_id": "para_900" }, { "text": "circumstances.” Id. at 359. An “objective analysis of the", "paragraph_id": "para_901" }, { "text": "circumstances of an encounter and the statements and actions of", "paragraph_id": "para_902" }, { "text": "the parties to it provides the most accurate assessment of the", "paragraph_id": "para_903" }, { "text": "primary purpose of the interrogation.” Id. at 360 (cleaned up). To", "paragraph_id": "para_904" }, { "text": "complete this objective analysis, “circumstances in which an", "paragraph_id": "para_905" }, { "text": "encounter occurs—e.g., at or near the scene of the crime versus at a", "paragraph_id": "para_906" }, { "text": "police station, during an ongoing emergency or afterwards”—must", "paragraph_id": "para_907" }, { "text": "be considered as they “are clearly matters of objective fact.” Id. The", "paragraph_id": "para_908" }, { "text": "“relevant inquiry” is the objective analysis of the “statements and", "paragraph_id": "para_909" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_910" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_911" }, { "text": "22", "paragraph_id": "para_912" }, { "text": "actions of the parties” rather than “the subjective or actual purpose", "paragraph_id": "para_913", "court_paragraph": 22 }, { "text": "of the individuals involved in a particular encounter.” Id. Courts", "paragraph_id": "para_914" }, { "text": "should consider “the purpose that reasonable participants would", "paragraph_id": "para_915" }, { "text": "have had, as ascertained from the individuals’ statements and", "paragraph_id": "para_916" }, { "text": "actions and the circumstances in which the encounter occurred.” Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_917" }, { "text": "¶73 With this understanding of the governing law, we turn to", "paragraph_id": "para_918" }, { "text": "whether, in light of all the circumstances viewed objectively, the", "paragraph_id": "para_919" }, { "text": "primary purpose of the officer’s conversation with Beth was to", "paragraph_id": "para_920" }, { "text": "create an out-of-court substitute for trial testimony. The nature and", "paragraph_id": "para_921" }, { "text": "proximity of the crime, the informality of the encounter, Beth’s", "paragraph_id": "para_922" }, { "text": "physical and emotional condition, and the nature of the", "paragraph_id": "para_923" }, { "text": "questioning, all suggest that the primary purpose of the encounter", "paragraph_id": "para_924" }, { "text": "was to assess whether immediate action was required to protect the", "paragraph_id": "para_925" }, { "text": "public, not to obtain evidence for Najera’s prosecution.", "paragraph_id": "para_926" }, { "text": "1. The Need for a Threat Assessment", "paragraph_id": "para_927" }, { "text": "¶74 In cases involving a victim’s statements to law", "paragraph_id": "para_928" }, { "text": "enforcement, “[t]he existence of an emergency or the parties’", "paragraph_id": "para_929" }, { "text": "perception that an emergency is ongoing is among the most", "paragraph_id": "para_930" }, { "text": "important circumstances that courts must take into account in", "paragraph_id": "para_931" }, { "text": "determining whether an interrogation is testimonial because", "paragraph_id": "para_932" }, { "text": "statements made to assist police in addressing an ongoing", "paragraph_id": "para_933" }, { "text": "emergency presumably lack the testimonial purpose that would", "paragraph_id": "para_934" }, { "text": "subject them to the requirement of confrontation.” Bryant, 562 U.S.", "paragraph_id": "para_935" }, { "text": "at 370. But, as explained above, whether the statements are", "paragraph_id": "para_936" }, { "text": "testimonial does not depend on whether the primary purpose of", "paragraph_id": "para_937" }, { "text": "the encounter was to address an ongoing emergency. The test is", "paragraph_id": "para_938" }, { "text": "whether, viewed objectively, the primary purpose of the encounter", "paragraph_id": "para_939" }, { "text": "was something other than eliciting the witness’s statement for use", "paragraph_id": "para_940" }, { "text": "in a prosecution.", "paragraph_id": "para_941" }, { "text": "¶75 In Bryant, the Court noted that the officers responding to a", "paragraph_id": "para_942" }, { "text": "call that a man had been shot “did not know why, where, or when", "paragraph_id": "para_943" }, { "text": "the shooting had occurred. Nor did they know the location of the", "paragraph_id": "para_944" }, { "text": "shooter or anything else about the circumstances in which the", "paragraph_id": "para_945" }, { "text": "crime occurred.” Id. at 375–76. When they arrived, they asked the", "paragraph_id": "para_946" }, { "text": "victim “the exact type of questions necessary to allow the police to", "paragraph_id": "para_947" }, { "text": "assess the situation, the threat to their own safety, and possible", "paragraph_id": "para_948" }, { "text": "danger to the potential victim and to the public.” Id. at 376 (cleaned", "paragraph_id": "para_949" }, { "text": "up); see also State v. Ohlson, 168 P.3d 1273, 1281 (Wash. 2007) (en", "paragraph_id": "para_950" }, { "text": "banc) (holding that a juvenile’s statements to an officer were", "paragraph_id": "para_951" }, { "text": "nontestimonial where the officer’s “initial inquiries sought", "paragraph_id": "para_952" }, { "text": "information essential to determining whether the situation", "paragraph_id": "para_953" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_954" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_955" }, { "text": "23", "paragraph_id": "para_956" }, { "text": "presented . . . ongoing dangers or threats” at least until the officer", "paragraph_id": "para_957", "court_paragraph": 23 }, { "text": "“completed her initial triage of the situation”).", "paragraph_id": "para_958" }, { "text": "¶76 Similarly, the officer who responded to the hospital did", "paragraph_id": "para_959" }, { "text": "not know why, when, or where the alleged rape had occurred. The", "paragraph_id": "para_960" }, { "text": "officer knew that Beth had gone to the emergency room and told", "paragraph_id": "para_961" }, { "text": "hospital staff that she had been raped. Beth appeared disheveled", "paragraph_id": "para_962" }, { "text": "and had a cut lip, suggesting that the alleged assailant had used", "paragraph_id": "para_963" }, { "text": "force. The officer learned within the first two minutes of the", "paragraph_id": "para_964" }, { "text": "conversation that the alleged rape had occurred right outside the", "paragraph_id": "para_965" }, { "text": "hospital. The officer also learned that the assailant was a stranger", "paragraph_id": "para_966" }, { "text": "to Beth and that his location was unknown.", "paragraph_id": "para_967" }, { "text": "¶77 Although the potential risk to the public may have been", "paragraph_id": "para_968" }, { "text": "less than the risk posed by the shooter in Bryant, the facts", "paragraph_id": "para_969" }, { "text": "nevertheless suggested that a woman had been violently raped by", "paragraph_id": "para_970" }, { "text": "a stranger who was on the loose in the immediate area surrounding", "paragraph_id": "para_971" }, { "text": "the hospital. Regardless of whether the circumstances rose to the", "paragraph_id": "para_972" }, { "text": "level of an “ongoing emergency,” the primary purpose of talking", "paragraph_id": "para_973" }, { "text": "to Beth was not to discover what had already occurred so that the", "paragraph_id": "para_974" }, { "text": "assailant could be prosecuted. It was to assess the current situation", "paragraph_id": "para_975" }, { "text": "so that the officer could determine whether immediate steps", "paragraph_id": "para_976" }, { "text": "needed to be taken to address any ongoing threat.", "paragraph_id": "para_977" }, { "text": "2. The Formality of the Interrogation", "paragraph_id": "para_978" }, { "text": "¶78 Another important factor in a primary purpose inquiry is", "paragraph_id": "para_979" }, { "text": "the level of formality in an encounter between a victim and police.", "paragraph_id": "para_980" }, { "text": "Bryant, 562 U.S. at 366. While “formality is not the sole touchstone", "paragraph_id": "para_981" }, { "text": "of our primary purpose inquiry,” it can suggest “the absence of an", "paragraph_id": "para_982" }, { "text": "emergency and therefore an increased likelihood that the purpose", "paragraph_id": "para_983" }, { "text": "of the interrogation is to establish or prove past events potentially", "paragraph_id": "para_984" }, { "text": "relevant to later criminal prosecution.” Id. (cleaned up). “The most", "paragraph_id": "para_985" }, { "text": "important instances in which the [Confrontation] Clause restricts", "paragraph_id": "para_986" }, { "text": "the introduction of out-of-court statements are those in which state", "paragraph_id": "para_987" }, { "text": "actors are involved in a formal, out-of-court interrogation of a", "paragraph_id": "para_988" }, { "text": "witness to obtain evidence for trial.” Id. at 358.", "paragraph_id": "para_989" }, { "text": "¶79 In Bryant, the Court found that the situation in which the", "paragraph_id": "para_990" }, { "text": "police questioned the gunshot victim was “more similar, though", "paragraph_id": "para_991" }, { "text": "not identical, to the informal, harried 911 call in Davis than to the", "paragraph_id": "para_992" }, { "text": "structured, station-house interview in Crawford.” Id. at 377. The", "paragraph_id": "para_993" }, { "text": "Court noted that “the situation was fluid and somewhat confused,”", "paragraph_id": "para_994" }, { "text": "with officers arriving at different times and each asking the victim", "paragraph_id": "para_995" }, { "text": "what happened. Id. “The informality suggest[ed] that the", "paragraph_id": "para_996" }, { "text": "interrogators’ primary purpose was simply to address what they", "paragraph_id": "para_997" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_998" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_999" }, { "text": "24", "paragraph_id": "para_1000" }, { "text": "perceived to be an ongoing emergency, and the circumstances", "paragraph_id": "para_1001", "court_paragraph": 24 }, { "text": "lacked any formality that would have alerted [the victim] to or", "paragraph_id": "para_1002" }, { "text": "focused him on the possible future prosecutorial use of his", "paragraph_id": "para_1003" }, { "text": "statements.” Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_1004" }, { "text": "¶80 As in Davis and Bryant, the encounter between Beth and", "paragraph_id": "para_1005" }, { "text": "the officer bore little resemblance to the stationhouse interview in", "paragraph_id": "para_1006" }, { "text": "Crawford. The officer approached Beth in a hospital emergency", "paragraph_id": "para_1007" }, { "text": "room shortly after her arrival. He could see that she was visibly", "paragraph_id": "para_1008" }, { "text": "distraught and did not ask to interview her or take her statement at", "paragraph_id": "para_1009" }, { "text": "that time. Instead, he told her that he just needed basic information", "paragraph_id": "para_1010" }, { "text": "so he could report back to his supervisor. Certainly, “the", "paragraph_id": "para_1011" }, { "text": "circumstances lacked any formality that would have alerted [Beth]", "paragraph_id": "para_1012" }, { "text": "to or focused [her] on the possible future prosecutorial use of [her]", "paragraph_id": "para_1013" }, { "text": "statements.” See id. The informality suggested that the officer’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1014" }, { "text": "primary purpose was to gather basic information to assess the", "paragraph_id": "para_1015" }, { "text": "situation, not to take Beth’s statement for use in a future", "paragraph_id": "para_1016" }, { "text": "prosecution. Such “initial inquiries . . . often produce", "paragraph_id": "para_1017" }, { "text": "nontestimonial statements.” Id. (cleaned up).", "paragraph_id": "para_1018" }, { "text": "3. The Declarant’s Physical Condition", "paragraph_id": "para_1019" }, { "text": "¶81 Beth’s physical condition is also relevant in determining", "paragraph_id": "para_1020" }, { "text": "whether the primary purpose of the encounter was to gather", "paragraph_id": "para_1021" }, { "text": "evidence. “The medical condition of the victim is important to the", "paragraph_id": "para_1022" }, { "text": "primary purpose inquiry to the extent that it sheds light on the", "paragraph_id": "para_1023" }, { "text": "ability of the victim to have any purpose at all in responding to", "paragraph_id": "para_1024" }, { "text": "police questions and on the likelihood that any purpose formed", "paragraph_id": "para_1025" }, { "text": "would necessarily be a testimonial one.” Bryant, 562 U.S. at 364–65.", "paragraph_id": "para_1026" }, { "text": "Furthermore, a victim’s medical state “provides important context", "paragraph_id": "para_1027" }, { "text": "for first responders to judge the existence and magnitude of a", "paragraph_id": "para_1028" }, { "text": "continuing threat to the victim, themselves, and the public.” Id. at", "paragraph_id": "para_1029" }, { "text": "365.", "paragraph_id": "para_1030" }, { "text": "¶82 Here, Beth was injured and had not yet been evaluated or", "paragraph_id": "para_1031" }, { "text": "treated. She was dirty, with debris in her hair, and had not yet been", "paragraph_id": "para_1032" }, { "text": "allowed to use the bathroom. She was visibly in shock and still", "paragraph_id": "para_1033" }, { "text": "processing what had just happened to her. She continually paced", "paragraph_id": "para_1034" }, { "text": "the room, cried, gagged, hid her face, and spoke in fits and starts,", "paragraph_id": "para_1035" }, { "text": "leaving sentences unfinished. She did not appear to possess the", "paragraph_id": "para_1036" }, { "text": "“ability . . . to have any purpose at all in responding to police", "paragraph_id": "para_1037" }, { "text": "questions.” Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_1038" }, { "text": "¶83 Taking Beth’s injuries into account “does not transform", "paragraph_id": "para_1039" }, { "text": "this objective inquiry into a subjective one.” Id. at 369. “The inquiry", "paragraph_id": "para_1040" }, { "text": "is still objective because it focuses on the understanding and", "paragraph_id": "para_1041" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_1042" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1043" }, { "text": "25", "paragraph_id": "para_1044" }, { "text": "purpose of a reasonable victim in the circumstances of the actual", "paragraph_id": "para_1045", "court_paragraph": 25 }, { "text": "victim—circumstances that prominently include the victim’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1046" }, { "text": "physical state.” Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_1047" }, { "text": "¶84 Considering Beth’s condition also places otherwise", "paragraph_id": "para_1048" }, { "text": "misleading facts into perspective. At first blush, the length of time", "paragraph_id": "para_1049" }, { "text": "Beth spoke with the officer and the amount of detail she shared", "paragraph_id": "para_1050" }, { "text": "might suggest that she was attempting to provide a statement for", "paragraph_id": "para_1051" }, { "text": "use in a future prosecution. But viewing the video of the encounter", "paragraph_id": "para_1052" }, { "text": "reveals a decidedly different picture. It captures a traumatized", "paragraph_id": "para_1053" }, { "text": "woman trying to come to terms with what has happened to her.", "paragraph_id": "para_1054" }, { "text": "Much of the time, she seems to forget that the officer is in the room", "paragraph_id": "para_1055" }, { "text": "and appears to be talking to herself, thinking out loud as she pieces", "paragraph_id": "para_1056" }, { "text": "together that night’s events. As she recalls details, she gasps, dry", "paragraph_id": "para_1057" }, { "text": "heaves, begins to cry, and appears to disassociate. The officer is not", "paragraph_id": "para_1058" }, { "text": "directing an interview, but merely standing by, offering occasional", "paragraph_id": "para_1059" }, { "text": "words of reassurance and waiting for an opportunity to extricate", "paragraph_id": "para_1060" }, { "text": "himself and report back to his supervisor. Viewing the encounter", "paragraph_id": "para_1061" }, { "text": "as a whole, Beth’s answers appear to “be simply reflexive,” id.,", "paragraph_id": "para_1062" }, { "text": "further supporting the idea that these were not the kind of", "paragraph_id": "para_1063" }, { "text": "testimonial statements that the Confrontation Clause forbids.", "paragraph_id": "para_1064" }, { "text": "4. The Nature of the Questioning", "paragraph_id": "para_1065" }, { "text": "¶85 “In many instances, the primary purpose of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1066" }, { "text": "interrogation will be most accurately ascertained by looking to the", "paragraph_id": "para_1067" }, { "text": "contents of both the questions and the answers.” Id. at 367–68.", "paragraph_id": "para_1068" }, { "text": "Statements are more likely to be nontestimonial when “the nature", "paragraph_id": "para_1069" }, { "text": "of what was asked and answered[,] . . . viewed objectively, was", "paragraph_id": "para_1070" }, { "text": "such that the elicited statements were necessary to be able to resolve", "paragraph_id": "para_1071" }, { "text": "the present emergency, rather than simply to learn . . . what had", "paragraph_id": "para_1072" }, { "text": "happened in the past.” Davis, 547 U.S. at 827.", "paragraph_id": "para_1073" }, { "text": "¶86 In Bryant, for example, the officers who arrived at the scene", "paragraph_id": "para_1074" }, { "text": "asked the gunshot victim “what had happened, who had shot him,", "paragraph_id": "para_1075" }, { "text": "and where the shooting had occurred.” 562 U.S. at 349 (cleaned up).", "paragraph_id": "para_1076" }, { "text": "The Court explained that such “initial inquiries may often produce", "paragraph_id": "para_1077" }, { "text": "nontestimonial statements.” Id. at 377 (cleaned up).", "paragraph_id": "para_1078" }, { "text": "¶87 Here, after asking for Beth’s name and date of birth, the", "paragraph_id": "para_1079" }, { "text": "officer asked only three relevant questions: (1) “Where did it occur", "paragraph_id": "para_1080" }, { "text": "at, the incident?” (2) “Do you know who it was?” and (3) “Do you", "paragraph_id": "para_1081" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_1082" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1083" }, { "text": "26", "paragraph_id": "para_1084" }, { "text": "have a—do you know a description?”5 The limited nature of those", "paragraph_id": "para_1085", "court_paragraph": 26 }, { "text": "questions objectively indicates that the officer was attempting to", "paragraph_id": "para_1086" }, { "text": "assess whether the assailant posed a safety risk to those nearby and", "paragraph_id": "para_1087" }, { "text": "who police should be looking for to resolve that risk. If conducting", "paragraph_id": "para_1088" }, { "text": "an interview to aid a future prosecution, one would expect the", "paragraph_id": "para_1089" }, { "text": "officer to ask far more questions—or any at all for that matter—", "paragraph_id": "para_1090" }, { "text": "about what had occurred. Those objective facts suggest that this", "paragraph_id": "para_1091" }, { "text": "was not such an interview, but merely triage.", "paragraph_id": "para_1092" }, { "text": "¶88 Beth was never asked what happened. The officer did not", "paragraph_id": "para_1093" }, { "text": "inquire about facts that would have gone to the elements of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1094" }, { "text": "crimes, such as whether the perpetrator was armed, used force or", "paragraph_id": "para_1095" }, { "text": "threats or force, inflicted any injuries, or committed certain types of", "paragraph_id": "para_1096" }, { "text": "sexual acts. While Beth volunteered some of that information, she", "paragraph_id": "para_1097" }, { "text": "did so while “trying to remember” where the crime occurred and", "paragraph_id": "para_1098" }, { "text": "what the perpetrator looked like. The objective circumstances in", "paragraph_id": "para_1099" }, { "text": "which the statements were made show that the primary purpose", "paragraph_id": "para_1100" }, { "text": "was not to establish past facts for criminal prosecution. Therefore,", "paragraph_id": "para_1101" }, { "text": "we hold that the statements Beth made to the officer were not", "paragraph_id": "para_1102" }, { "text": "testimonial. Because the Confrontation Clause does not apply to", "paragraph_id": "para_1103" }, { "text": "nontestimonial statements, their admissibility depends on the rules", "paragraph_id": "para_1104" }, { "text": "of evidence.", "paragraph_id": "para_1105" }, { "text": "B. Beth’s Statements to the Officer Are Admissible Hearsay", "paragraph_id": "para_1106" }, { "text": "Because They Were Excited Utterances", "paragraph_id": "para_1107" }, { "text": "¶89 Najera next argues that the district court abused its", "paragraph_id": "para_1108" }, { "text": "discretion in admitting Beth’s statements to the officer under a", "paragraph_id": "para_1109" }, { "text": "hearsay exception. The statements Beth made to the officer are", "paragraph_id": "para_1110" }, { "text": "hearsay because they were made outside of court and the State", "paragraph_id": "para_1111" }, { "text": "wishes to offer them as proof that the things Beth described are", "paragraph_id": "para_1112" }, { "text": "true. See UTAH R. EVID. 801(c). As a general matter, hearsay is", "paragraph_id": "para_1113" }, { "text": "inadmissible, see id. R. 802, but there are multiple exceptions to the", "paragraph_id": "para_1114" }, { "text": "rule against hearsay, State v. Green, 2023 UT 10, ¶ 83, 532 P.3d 930.", "paragraph_id": "para_1115" }, { "text": "One of those exceptions is rule 803(2), which applies to excited", "paragraph_id": "para_1116" }, { "text": "utterances. See UTAH R. EVID. 803(2).", "paragraph_id": "para_1117" }, { "text": "¶90 Rule 803(2) defines excited utterances as statements", "paragraph_id": "para_1118" }, { "text": "“relating to a startling event or condition, made while the declarant", "paragraph_id": "para_1119" }, { "text": "__________________________________________________________", "paragraph_id": "para_1120" }, { "text": "5 While the officer asked several other questions, those", "paragraph_id": "para_1121" }, { "text": "questions were not substantive and consisted entirely of clarifying", "paragraph_id": "para_1122" }, { "text": "questions as well as inquiries about the victim’s well-being as the", "paragraph_id": "para_1123" }, { "text": "conversation proceeded.", "paragraph_id": "para_1124" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_1125" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1126" }, { "text": "27", "paragraph_id": "para_1127" }, { "text": "was under the stress of excitement that it caused.” Id. “The", "paragraph_id": "para_1128", "court_paragraph": 27 }, { "text": "generally accepted rationale for the exception is that declarations", "paragraph_id": "para_1129" }, { "text": "made during a state of excitement temporarily still a declarant’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1130" }, { "text": "capacity to reflect and thereby produce utterances free of conscious", "paragraph_id": "para_1131" }, { "text": "fabrication.” State v. Smith, 909 P.2d 236, 239–40 (Utah 1995). Three", "paragraph_id": "para_1132" }, { "text": "conditions must be met to satisfy the exception: “(1) a startling", "paragraph_id": "para_1133" }, { "text": "event or condition occurred; (2) the statement was made while the", "paragraph_id": "para_1134" }, { "text": "declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or", "paragraph_id": "para_1135" }, { "text": "condition; and (3) the statement relates to the startling event or", "paragraph_id": "para_1136" }, { "text": "condition.” State v. Cude, 784 P.2d 1197, 1200 (Utah 1989) (cleaned", "paragraph_id": "para_1137" }, { "text": "up).", "paragraph_id": "para_1138" }, { "text": "¶91 Here, it is clear both that a startling event occurred—the", "paragraph_id": "para_1139" }, { "text": "alleged rape—and that the statements the court ruled admissible", "paragraph_id": "para_1140" }, { "text": "related to that startling event. The only question before us is", "paragraph_id": "para_1141" }, { "text": "whether the statements were made while Beth “was under the", "paragraph_id": "para_1142" }, { "text": "stress of [the] excitement caused by” the alleged assault.", "paragraph_id": "para_1143" }, { "text": "¶92 To satisfy this condition, “the declarant’s declaration must", "paragraph_id": "para_1144" }, { "text": "be a spontaneous reaction to the event or condition, not the result", "paragraph_id": "para_1145" }, { "text": "of reflective thought.” Smith, 909 P.2d at 239. “The justification for", "paragraph_id": "para_1146" }, { "text": "the exception disappears as the emotional excitement of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1147" }, { "text": "declarant subsides and the declarant’s capacity for reflection", "paragraph_id": "para_1148" }, { "text": "revives.” Id. at 240 (cleaned up). However, “the statement need not", "paragraph_id": "para_1149" }, { "text": "be strictly contemporaneous with the startling event to be", "paragraph_id": "para_1150" }, { "text": "spontaneous, as is the case with the ‘present sense impression’", "paragraph_id": "para_1151" }, { "text": "exception.” Id. (cleaned up); see also UTAH R. EVID. 803(1).", "paragraph_id": "para_1152" }, { "text": "Ultimately,", "paragraph_id": "para_1153" }, { "text": "the determinative factor, subject to no precise or", "paragraph_id": "para_1154" }, { "text": "absolute standard, is whether the state of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1155" }, { "text": "declarant’s mind was such that because of a high", "paragraph_id": "para_1156" }, { "text": "degree of emotional arousal, the declaration was", "paragraph_id": "para_1157" }, { "text": "spontaneous in the sense that the declarant’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1158" }, { "text": "emotional arousal or excitement at the time of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1159" }, { "text": "statement strongly suggested that the statement came", "paragraph_id": "para_1160" }, { "text": "purely from the declarant’s memory, unchanged or", "paragraph_id": "para_1161" }, { "text": "distorted by a consideration of the consequences of", "paragraph_id": "para_1162" }, { "text": "the statement.", "paragraph_id": "para_1163" }, { "text": "Smith, 909 P.2d at 240.", "paragraph_id": "para_1164" }, { "text": "¶93 Our court has considered a number of factors when", "paragraph_id": "para_1165" }, { "text": "determining whether the stress of the event stilled the declarant’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1166" }, { "text": "capacity for reflective thought. Those factors include “the", "paragraph_id": "para_1167" }, { "text": "declarant’s age, the declarant’s physical and mental condition, the", "paragraph_id": "para_1168" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_1169" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1170" }, { "text": "28", "paragraph_id": "para_1171" }, { "text": "circumstances and nature of the startling event, the subject matter", "paragraph_id": "para_1172", "court_paragraph": 28 }, { "text": "of the statement, and the time lapse between the event and the", "paragraph_id": "para_1173" }, { "text": "utterance.” Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_1174" }, { "text": "¶94 We begin with Beth’s physical and mental condition.", "paragraph_id": "para_1175" }, { "text": "“[W]hat is critical” is that the declarant exhibits “a mental state that", "paragraph_id": "para_1176" }, { "text": "tends to block reflection and the reasoning process.” Id. at 241. After", "paragraph_id": "para_1177" }, { "text": "reviewing Beth’s demeanor and responses on the video of her", "paragraph_id": "para_1178" }, { "text": "conversation with the officer, we conclude that “surely occurred", "paragraph_id": "para_1179" }, { "text": "here.” See id. On the video, Beth appears to be in shock and", "paragraph_id": "para_1180" }, { "text": "processing in real time what had happened to her. Her reactions", "paragraph_id": "para_1181" }, { "text": "suggest that she is recalling snapshots of the alleged rape as she", "paragraph_id": "para_1182" }, { "text": "speaks. As bits and pieces come back to her, she gasps, gags, dry", "paragraph_id": "para_1183" }, { "text": "heaves, cries, hides her face, and tells herself that this is not", "paragraph_id": "para_1184" }, { "text": "happening to her. Her statements are spontaneous and largely", "paragraph_id": "para_1185" }, { "text": "unprompted and spill out as a stream of consciousness. The", "paragraph_id": "para_1186" }, { "text": "evidence suggests that Beth’s statements sprang purely from", "paragraph_id": "para_1187" }, { "text": "memory “unchanged or distorted by a consideration of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1188" }, { "text": "consequences” and “made by free recall.” Id. at 240–41.", "paragraph_id": "para_1189" }, { "text": "¶95 Despite the evidence of Beth’s apparent distress, Najera", "paragraph_id": "para_1190" }, { "text": "asserts that the excitement of the event had subsided by the time", "paragraph_id": "para_1191" }, { "text": "Beth spoke to the officer an hour and a half later. “Generally, the", "paragraph_id": "para_1192" }, { "text": "shorter the gap between the startling event and the utterance, the", "paragraph_id": "para_1193" }, { "text": "more reliable the statement since the excitement of the event is", "paragraph_id": "para_1194" }, { "text": "unlikely to have yielded to reasoned reflection and conscious", "paragraph_id": "para_1195" }, { "text": "fabrication.” Cude, 784 P.2d at 1200. But “the length of time between", "paragraph_id": "para_1196" }, { "text": "the event and the declaration is not a yardstick by which reliability", "paragraph_id": "para_1197" }, { "text": "can be measured.” Id. Instead, “the more accurate gauge—and the", "paragraph_id": "para_1198" }, { "text": "more difficult to read—is the state of the declarant’s mind.” Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_1199" }, { "text": "¶96 To be sure, the time elapsed between the alleged rape and", "paragraph_id": "para_1200" }, { "text": "Beth’s statements to the officer might suggest that she had time to", "paragraph_id": "para_1201" }, { "text": "reflect on the events. But we have strong video evidence of Beth’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1202" }, { "text": "state of mind at the time of the statements. The manner in which", "paragraph_id": "para_1203" }, { "text": "Beth appeared to suddenly recall details and her physical reactions", "paragraph_id": "para_1204" }, { "text": "to those memories support the district court’s conclusion that she", "paragraph_id": "para_1205" }, { "text": "was still under the emotional stress of the event and had no", "paragraph_id": "para_1206" }, { "text": "capacity for reflection between the alleged rape and her statements", "paragraph_id": "para_1207" }, { "text": "to the officer.", "paragraph_id": "para_1208" }, { "text": "¶97 Najera also points out that there are moments in the video", "paragraph_id": "para_1209" }, { "text": "where Beth appears outwardly calm, suggesting that she was no", "paragraph_id": "para_1210" }, { "text": "longer in a high state of emotional arousal. But those moments", "paragraph_id": "para_1211" }, { "text": "could suggest, alternatively, that Beth is in a state of shock. At", "paragraph_id": "para_1212" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_1213" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1214" }, { "text": "29", "paragraph_id": "para_1215" }, { "text": "times, she appears to be disassociating, insisting that this is not", "paragraph_id": "para_1216", "court_paragraph": 29 }, { "text": "happening and “This isn’t me.” See Smith, 909 P.2d at 241 (holding", "paragraph_id": "para_1217" }, { "text": "that victim’s statements to a child abuse investigator within three", "paragraph_id": "para_1218" }, { "text": "hours of assault were admissible where victim was bleeding, in", "paragraph_id": "para_1219" }, { "text": "pain, and in a “dissociative state” of “psychic shock”). She exhibits", "paragraph_id": "para_1220" }, { "text": "a flat affect and periodically stares into space before appearing to", "paragraph_id": "para_1221" }, { "text": "jolt back to awareness. The sudden shifts in emotion only serve to", "paragraph_id": "para_1222" }, { "text": "underscore the extreme stress she is still under from the event.", "paragraph_id": "para_1223" }, { "text": "¶98 Given the evidence documenting Beth’s condition during", "paragraph_id": "para_1224" }, { "text": "the interaction with the officer, the district court did not abuse its", "paragraph_id": "para_1225" }, { "text": "discretion in ruling that Beth’s statements to him were excited", "paragraph_id": "para_1226" }, { "text": "utterances under rule 803(2). On this record, “there is no reason to", "paragraph_id": "para_1227" }, { "text": "believe that [Beth’s] responses were anything other than an", "paragraph_id": "para_1228" }, { "text": "accurate report of her memory of very recent events that were", "paragraph_id": "para_1229" }, { "text": "accurately perceived.” Id. at 243. Thus, we affirm the district court’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1230" }, { "text": "ruling admitting Beth’s statements to the officer.", "paragraph_id": "para_1231" }, { "text": "II. STATEMENTS TO THE NURSE", "paragraph_id": "para_1232" }, { "text": "¶99 Najera also argues that the district court erred by", "paragraph_id": "para_1233" }, { "text": "determining that the statements Beth made to the nurse were", "paragraph_id": "para_1234" }, { "text": "nontestimonial because, in his view, the “primary purpose was to", "paragraph_id": "para_1235" }, { "text": "establish past events and preserve evidence for future", "paragraph_id": "para_1236" }, { "text": "prosecution.” Both parties recognize that SANE exams have dual", "paragraph_id": "para_1237" }, { "text": "purposes. But they disagree over which purpose is the primary one:", "paragraph_id": "para_1238" }, { "text": "Najera contends that “the criminal-investigation aspect of a SANE", "paragraph_id": "para_1239" }, { "text": "exam so pervades the exam” that the “exam’s primary purpose is", "paragraph_id": "para_1240" }, { "text": "testimonial” and the State contends that the “overriding purpose is", "paragraph_id": "para_1241" }, { "text": "to provide medical care.” If we conclude that the statements are", "paragraph_id": "para_1242" }, { "text": "nontestimonial, Najera argues that the district court erred when it", "paragraph_id": "para_1243" }, { "text": "determined that Beth’s statements to the nurse were admissible", "paragraph_id": "para_1244" }, { "text": "under the statement for medical diagnosis or treatment exception", "paragraph_id": "para_1245" }, { "text": "to the rule against hearsay.", "paragraph_id": "para_1246" }, { "text": "¶100 Again, we start with an analysis of whether the", "paragraph_id": "para_1247" }, { "text": "statements are testimonial. Because we conclude that they are not,", "paragraph_id": "para_1248" }, { "text": "we turn to whether the statements were properly admitted under", "paragraph_id": "para_1249" }, { "text": "our rules of evidence. We conclude that the district court acted", "paragraph_id": "para_1250" }, { "text": "within its discretion in admitting the statements under the medical", "paragraph_id": "para_1251" }, { "text": "treatment hearsay exception.", "paragraph_id": "para_1252" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_1253" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1254" }, { "text": "30", "paragraph_id": "para_1255" }, { "text": "A. Admission of Beth’s Statements to the Nurse Does Not Violate", "paragraph_id": "para_1256", "court_paragraph": 30 }, { "text": "the Confrontation Clause Because the Primary Purpose Was", "paragraph_id": "para_1257" }, { "text": "Not To Create Evidence for Prosecution", "paragraph_id": "para_1258" }, { "text": "¶101 The district court ruled that the statements Beth made to", "paragraph_id": "para_1259" }, { "text": "the nurse were nontestimonial because the “primary purpose of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1260" }, { "text": "SANE examination and report [was] for the purposes of diagnosis", "paragraph_id": "para_1261" }, { "text": "and treatment.” Although Najera agrees that medical care is one", "paragraph_id": "para_1262" }, { "text": "purpose of a SANE exam, he pushes back on the district court’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1263" }, { "text": "conclusion that it is the primary purpose.", "paragraph_id": "para_1264" }, { "text": "¶102 The United States Supreme Court has never applied the", "paragraph_id": "para_1265" }, { "text": "Confrontation Clause to SANEs. Various courts have reached", "paragraph_id": "para_1266" }, { "text": "different conclusions on the question of whether a victim’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1267" }, { "text": "statements to a SANE are testimonial or nontestimonial. But “what", "paragraph_id": "para_1268" }, { "text": "seems consistent in nearly all cases is the courts’ use of case-specific", "paragraph_id": "para_1269" }, { "text": "analysis of the challenged statements based on the totality of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1270" }, { "text": "underlying circumstances to determine the testimonial or", "paragraph_id": "para_1271" }, { "text": "nontestimonial nature of the statements.” State v. Miller, 264 P.3d", "paragraph_id": "para_1272" }, { "text": "461, 482 (Kan. 2011).", "paragraph_id": "para_1273" }, { "text": "¶103 These cases illustrate that statements made during a", "paragraph_id": "para_1274" }, { "text": "SANE exam are not categorically testimonial or nontestimonial.", "paragraph_id": "para_1275" }, { "text": "Not all SANE exams are alike. A case-by-case approach is", "paragraph_id": "para_1276" }, { "text": "consistent with the Supreme Court’s instruction that “courts", "paragraph_id": "para_1277" }, { "text": "should look to all of the relevant circumstances” when", "paragraph_id": "para_1278" }, { "text": "“determining whether a declarant’s statements are testimonial.”", "paragraph_id": "para_1279" }, { "text": "Michigan v. Bryant, 562 U.S. 344, 369 (2011); see also Ohio v. Clark, 576", "paragraph_id": "para_1280" }, { "text": "U.S. 237, 245 (2015) (“The question is whether, in light of all the", "paragraph_id": "para_1281" }, { "text": "circumstances, viewed objectively, the primary purpose of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1282" }, { "text": "conversation was to create an out-of-court substitute for trial", "paragraph_id": "para_1283" }, { "text": "testimony.” (cleaned up)).", "paragraph_id": "para_1284" }, { "text": "¶104 The courts that have addressed this question have relied", "paragraph_id": "para_1285" }, { "text": "on various factors to evaluate whether a victim’s statements during", "paragraph_id": "para_1286" }, { "text": "a particular SANE exam are testimonial. Among other things,", "paragraph_id": "para_1287" }, { "text": "courts have considered the presence and involvement of law", "paragraph_id": "para_1288" }, { "text": "enforcement, the time elapsed since the assault and the need for", "paragraph_id": "para_1289" }, { "text": "medical treatment, the formality of the exchange, and whether the", "paragraph_id": "para_1290" }, { "text": "statements and actions of the participants objectively reflect a focus", "paragraph_id": "para_1291" }, { "text": "on the prosecution of a crime.6 While those same factors may not", "paragraph_id": "para_1292" }, { "text": "__________________________________________________________", "paragraph_id": "para_1293" }, { "text": "6 See, e.g., State v. Tsosie, 516 P.3d 1116, 1140 (N.M. 2022) (“The", "paragraph_id": "para_1294" }, { "text": "relevant surrounding circumstances here include the time elapsed", "paragraph_id": "para_1295" }, { "text": "(continued . . .)", "paragraph_id": "para_1296" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_1297" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1298" }, { "text": "31", "paragraph_id": "para_1299" }, { "text": "__________________________________________________________", "paragraph_id": "para_1300", "court_paragraph": 31 }, { "text": "between the alleged assault and the SANE exam, the location of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1301" }, { "text": "SANE exam, the role of law enforcement in the SANE exam, and", "paragraph_id": "para_1302" }, { "text": "the identity of the SANE nurse as [her] dual role bears on the", "paragraph_id": "para_1303" }, { "text": "challenged statements.”); State v. Miller, 264 P.3d 461, 486 (Kan.", "paragraph_id": "para_1304" }, { "text": "2011) (“[W]ith the guidance of the United States Supreme Court in", "paragraph_id": "para_1305" }, { "text": "mind, we turn to an objective analysis of the circumstances of [the", "paragraph_id": "para_1306" }, { "text": "victim’s] encounter with the SANE, considering factors such as", "paragraph_id": "para_1307" }, { "text": "whether the SANE was a State actor or agent, whether there was an", "paragraph_id": "para_1308" }, { "text": "ongoing emergency, whether the encounter was formal, and", "paragraph_id": "para_1309" }, { "text": "whether the statements and actions of both [the victim] and the", "paragraph_id": "para_1310" }, { "text": "SANE reflect a primary purpose focusing on the later prosecution", "paragraph_id": "para_1311" }, { "text": "of a crime.”); Hartsfield v. Commonwealth, 277 S.W.3d 239, 244 (Ky.", "paragraph_id": "para_1312" }, { "text": "2009) (“In Davis, the Court cited factors that are instructive in", "paragraph_id": "para_1313" }, { "text": "characterizing a statement as testimonial, including: whether the", "paragraph_id": "para_1314" }, { "text": "events spoken about were actually happening, or were past events;", "paragraph_id": "para_1315" }, { "text": "the presence of an ongoing emergency; whether what was asked", "paragraph_id": "para_1316" }, { "text": "and answered was for the purpose of resolving the situation, rather", "paragraph_id": "para_1317" }, { "text": "than simply learning what had happened in the past; and, finally,", "paragraph_id": "para_1318" }, { "text": "the level of formality in the interview.”); State v. Nelson, 954 N.W.2d", "paragraph_id": "para_1319" }, { "text": "11, 19 (Wis. Ct. App. 2020) (“Some factors for determining the", "paragraph_id": "para_1320" }, { "text": "primary purpose of a particular statement include: (1) the", "paragraph_id": "para_1321" }, { "text": "formality/informality of the situation producing the out-of-court", "paragraph_id": "para_1322" }, { "text": "statement; (2) whether the statement is given to law enforcement or", "paragraph_id": "para_1323" }, { "text": "a non-law enforcement individual; (3) the age of the declarant and", "paragraph_id": "para_1324" }, { "text": "(4) the context in which the statement was given.” (cleaned up));", "paragraph_id": "para_1325" }, { "text": "Thompson v. State, 438 P.3d 373, 377 (Okla. Crim. App. 2019)", "paragraph_id": "para_1326" }, { "text": "(“Courts considering the issue have focused on various factors that", "paragraph_id": "para_1327" }, { "text": "are relevant to the primary purpose determination, including inter", "paragraph_id": "para_1328" }, { "text": "alia: 1) the objective intent of the SANE nurse and the alleged", "paragraph_id": "para_1329" }, { "text": "victim; 2) the classification of the SANE nurse as either a medical", "paragraph_id": "para_1330" }, { "text": "professional or a law enforcement agent; 3) the setting of the exam;", "paragraph_id": "para_1331" }, { "text": "4) whether the alleged victim’s statement contained specific", "paragraph_id": "para_1332" }, { "text": "accusations; 5) the amount of time that elapsed between the exam", "paragraph_id": "para_1333" }, { "text": "and the assault; 6) whether the SANE nurse participated in the", "paragraph_id": "para_1334" }, { "text": "medical treatment of the victim; 7) whether a law enforcement", "paragraph_id": "para_1335" }, { "text": "officer was present; 8) the primacy of medical purpose; and 9) the", "paragraph_id": "para_1336" }, { "text": "intention underlying the victim’s answers.”); State v. Hill, 336 P.3d", "paragraph_id": "para_1337" }, { "text": "1283, 1287 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014) (“Other courts examining similar", "paragraph_id": "para_1338" }, { "text": "exchanges under the Confrontation Clause have looked to where", "paragraph_id": "para_1339" }, { "text": "the examination took place, the victim’s medical condition,", "paragraph_id": "para_1340" }, { "text": "(continued . . .)", "paragraph_id": "para_1341" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_1342" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1343" }, { "text": "32", "paragraph_id": "para_1344" }, { "text": "be relevant in every case, we find them useful in structuring our", "paragraph_id": "para_1345", "court_paragraph": 32 }, { "text": "analysis here.", "paragraph_id": "para_1346" }, { "text": "1. Presence and Involvement of Law Enforcement", "paragraph_id": "para_1347" }, { "text": "¶105 An alleged victim’s statements during a SANE exam are", "paragraph_id": "para_1348" }, { "text": "more likely to be testimonial if law enforcement officers are present", "paragraph_id": "para_1349" }, { "text": "during the exam, if officers engage in direct questioning, or if the", "paragraph_id": "para_1350" }, { "text": "interview is structured to gather evidence for prosecution.7", "paragraph_id": "para_1351" }, { "text": "Statements made to persons other than law enforcement “are much", "paragraph_id": "para_1352" }, { "text": "less likely to be testimonial than statements to law enforcement", "paragraph_id": "para_1353" }, { "text": "officers.” Clark, 576 U.S. at 246. Because “law enforcement officers", "paragraph_id": "para_1354" }, { "text": "are principally charged with uncovering and prosecuting criminal", "paragraph_id": "para_1355" }, { "text": "behavior[,] . . . statements made to them are much more likely to be", "paragraph_id": "para_1356" }, { "text": "used as a substitute for trial testimony.” State v. Burke, 478 P.3d", "paragraph_id": "para_1357" }, { "text": "1096, 1107 (Wash. 2021) (en banc) (cleaned up).", "paragraph_id": "para_1358" }, { "text": "¶106 In State v. Bennington, for example, the Kansas Supreme", "paragraph_id": "para_1359" }, { "text": "Court held that a victim’s statements during a SANE exam were", "paragraph_id": "para_1360" }, { "text": "testimonial, and their admission violated the Confrontation Clause,", "paragraph_id": "para_1361" }, { "text": "in part, because of the presence of a law enforcement officer. 264", "paragraph_id": "para_1362" }, { "text": "P.3d 440, 453–54 (Kan. 2011). In that case, while the nurse was", "paragraph_id": "para_1363" }, { "text": "__________________________________________________________", "paragraph_id": "para_1364" }, { "text": "whether law enforcement officers were present and the formality", "paragraph_id": "para_1365" }, { "text": "of the exchange.”).", "paragraph_id": "para_1366" }, { "text": "7 See, e.g., State v. Swartz, 17 N.W.3d 174, 187–88 (Neb. 2025)", "paragraph_id": "para_1367" }, { "text": "(“[C]ourts have excluded a SANE report, reasoning that a victim’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1368" }, { "text": "statements to a sexual assault examiner were testimonial and", "paragraph_id": "para_1369" }, { "text": "violate the confrontation clause because of the examiner’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1370" }, { "text": "relationship with police or the involvement of the police in the", "paragraph_id": "para_1371" }, { "text": "examination process, coupled with the absence of any need for, or", "paragraph_id": "para_1372" }, { "text": "provision of, medical treatment during the examination.”); Miller,", "paragraph_id": "para_1373" }, { "text": "264 P.3d at 482 (“[I]f a law enforcement officer participates in the", "paragraph_id": "para_1374" }, { "text": "questioning, there is a strong trend toward finding the victim’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1375" }, { "text": "statements testimonial.”); Hobgood v. State, 926 So. 2d 847, 852 (Miss.", "paragraph_id": "para_1376" }, { "text": "2006) (“[A] statement is testimonial when it is given to the police or", "paragraph_id": "para_1377" }, { "text": "individuals working in connection with the police for the purpose", "paragraph_id": "para_1378" }, { "text": "of prosecuting the accused.”); Hill, 336 P.3d at 1289 (“Courts also", "paragraph_id": "para_1379" }, { "text": "have refused to admit statements made by a victim during a", "paragraph_id": "para_1380" }, { "text": "forensic medical examination when there is evidence of heightened", "paragraph_id": "para_1381" }, { "text": "police involvement—when, for example, an officer was present", "paragraph_id": "para_1382" }, { "text": "during the examination, or the examination was recorded for law", "paragraph_id": "para_1383" }, { "text": "enforcement purposes.”).", "paragraph_id": "para_1384" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_1385" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1386" }, { "text": "33", "paragraph_id": "para_1387" }, { "text": "taking a history from the victim before beginning the physical", "paragraph_id": "para_1388", "court_paragraph": 33 }, { "text": "exam, a law enforcement officer was present and “asked [the", "paragraph_id": "para_1389" }, { "text": "victim] a few specific questions.” Id. at 452. The nurse’s report did", "paragraph_id": "para_1390" }, { "text": "not distinguish statements the victim made to the nurse from", "paragraph_id": "para_1391" }, { "text": "statements made to the officer. Id. The court explained that “the", "paragraph_id": "para_1392" }, { "text": "presence of the law enforcement officer during the initial taking of", "paragraph_id": "para_1393" }, { "text": "a history from [the victim] blurs the ‘primary purpose’ of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1394" }, { "text": "interview.” Id. at 453.", "paragraph_id": "para_1395" }, { "text": "¶107 In State v. Cannon, the Tennessee Supreme Court similarly", "paragraph_id": "para_1396" }, { "text": "held that statements made to a nurse employed by the Sexual", "paragraph_id": "para_1397" }, { "text": "Assault Crisis Center were testimonial, in part, because of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1398" }, { "text": "presence and involvement of a detective. 254 S.W.3d 287, 293, 305", "paragraph_id": "para_1399" }, { "text": "(Tenn. 2008). In that case, both the detective and the nurse", "paragraph_id": "para_1400" }, { "text": "questioned the victim after the victim had already been examined", "paragraph_id": "para_1401" }, { "text": "in the emergency room. Id. at 305. Additionally, the nurse “had", "paragraph_id": "para_1402" }, { "text": "been instructed by speakers from law enforcement agencies and", "paragraph_id": "para_1403" }, { "text": "from the district attorney’s office on . . . how to ask questions,” she", "paragraph_id": "para_1404" }, { "text": "“often testifie[d] at trials in her capacity as a sexual assault nurse", "paragraph_id": "para_1405" }, { "text": "examiner,” and she described her interview “as an ‘investigation’", "paragraph_id": "para_1406" }, { "text": "designed to gain information about the rape.” Id. Based on these", "paragraph_id": "para_1407" }, { "text": "circumstances, the court concluded that “the primary purpose of", "paragraph_id": "para_1408" }, { "text": "the interrogation was ‘to establish or prove past events potentially", "paragraph_id": "para_1409" }, { "text": "relevant to later criminal prosecution.’” Id. (quoting Davis v.", "paragraph_id": "para_1410" }, { "text": "Washington, 547 U.S. 813, 822 (2006)).8", "paragraph_id": "para_1411" }, { "text": "¶108 On the other hand, when law enforcement officers are not", "paragraph_id": "para_1412" }, { "text": "present during the exam or when their role is minimal, a victim’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1413" }, { "text": "statements during a SANE exam are less likely to be deemed", "paragraph_id": "para_1414" }, { "text": "testimonial. “Statements made to someone who is not principally", "paragraph_id": "para_1415" }, { "text": "__________________________________________________________", "paragraph_id": "para_1416" }, { "text": "8 See also State v. Hooper, 176 P.3d 911, 917 (Idaho 2007) (holding", "paragraph_id": "para_1417" }, { "text": "that a child victim’s statements to a nurse were testimonial where", "paragraph_id": "para_1418" }, { "text": "a detective was watching to ensure the nurse “remember[ed] to ask", "paragraph_id": "para_1419" }, { "text": "all the questions,” the nurse “consulted with the detective” near the", "paragraph_id": "para_1420" }, { "text": "end of the interview, and the nurse then returned to ask “questions", "paragraph_id": "para_1421" }, { "text": "regarding specific details”); State v. Gatewood, No. E2017-00653-", "paragraph_id": "para_1422" }, { "text": "CCA-R9-CD, 2018 WL 1391812, at *7 (Tenn. Crim. App. Mar. 20,", "paragraph_id": "para_1423" }, { "text": "2018) (holding that a child victim’s statements to a nurse", "paragraph_id": "para_1424" }, { "text": "practitioner were testimonial where the child went to the", "paragraph_id": "para_1425" }, { "text": "Children’s Advocacy Center “at the direction of the police” and the", "paragraph_id": "para_1426" }, { "text": "nurse “consulted” with police “while the victim was at the", "paragraph_id": "para_1427" }, { "text": "Children’s Advocacy Center”).", "paragraph_id": "para_1428" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_1429" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1430" }, { "text": "34", "paragraph_id": "para_1431" }, { "text": "charged with uncovering and prosecuting criminal behavior are", "paragraph_id": "para_1432", "court_paragraph": 34 }, { "text": "significantly less likely to be testimonial than statements given to", "paragraph_id": "para_1433" }, { "text": "law enforcement officers.” Clark, 576 U.S. at 249; accord Burke, 478", "paragraph_id": "para_1434" }, { "text": "P.3d at 1108 (“Statements made to witnesses other than law", "paragraph_id": "para_1435" }, { "text": "enforcement officers are far more likely to be made for reasons not", "paragraph_id": "para_1436" }, { "text": "primarily associated with criminal prosecution.”).", "paragraph_id": "para_1437" }, { "text": "¶109 For example, in State v. Hill, the Arizona Court of Appeals", "paragraph_id": "para_1438" }, { "text": "held that a victim’s statements to a nurse who was trained to", "paragraph_id": "para_1439" }, { "text": "perform forensic exams were nontestimonial, in part, because “[n]o", "paragraph_id": "para_1440" }, { "text": "law enforcement officer was present during any part of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1441" }, { "text": "examination.” 336 P.3d 1283, 1284, 1289 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). The", "paragraph_id": "para_1442" }, { "text": "court reasoned, “The objective circumstances of the exchange that", "paragraph_id": "para_1443" }, { "text": "produced the statement . . . indicate that its primary purpose was", "paragraph_id": "para_1444" }, { "text": "medical treatment, not the collection of evidence of a crime.” Id. at", "paragraph_id": "para_1445" }, { "text": "1290.", "paragraph_id": "para_1446" }, { "text": "¶110 Similarly, in People v. Vigil, the Colorado Supreme Court,", "paragraph_id": "para_1447" }, { "text": "sitting en banc, held that a child victim’s statements to a doctor", "paragraph_id": "para_1448" }, { "text": "were nontestimonial, in part, because the law enforcement officer", "paragraph_id": "para_1449" }, { "text": "“was not involved in the medical examination or in the room when", "paragraph_id": "para_1450" }, { "text": "the doctor performed the examination.” 127 P.3d 916, 924 (Colo.", "paragraph_id": "para_1451" }, { "text": "2006) (en banc). The court acknowledged that “the doctor was a", "paragraph_id": "para_1452" }, { "text": "member of a child protection team,” but it reasoned that this fact", "paragraph_id": "para_1453" }, { "text": "“does not, in and of itself, make him a government official absent a", "paragraph_id": "para_1454" }, { "text": "more direct and controlling police presence.” Id. at 923–24.9", "paragraph_id": "para_1455" }, { "text": "__________________________________________________________", "paragraph_id": "para_1456" }, { "text": "9 See also Tsosie, 516 P.3d at 1141 (holding that “the degree of", "paragraph_id": "para_1457" }, { "text": "involvement of law enforcement in the SANE exam here does not", "paragraph_id": "para_1458" }, { "text": "weigh toward a testimonial primary purpose” because the nurse", "paragraph_id": "para_1459" }, { "text": "testified that “law enforcement officers are not allowed in the", "paragraph_id": "para_1460" }, { "text": "SANE exam,” that “SANE nurses ‘do not work for the police,’” and", "paragraph_id": "para_1461" }, { "text": "that the advocacy center the nurse did work for was “a ‘nonprofit", "paragraph_id": "para_1462" }, { "text": "and . . . separate’ from the police”); Burke, 478 P.3d at 1112 (holding", "paragraph_id": "para_1463" }, { "text": "that most of a victim’s statements were nontestimonial where “[n]o", "paragraph_id": "para_1464" }, { "text": "member of law enforcement was present during the exam, and [the", "paragraph_id": "para_1465" }, { "text": "nurse] did not take any direction from law enforcement”); State v.", "paragraph_id": "para_1466" }, { "text": "Krasky, 736 N.W.2d 636, 641–43 (Minn. 2007) (en banc) (holding that", "paragraph_id": "para_1467" }, { "text": "a child victim’s statements to a nurse were nontestimonial where", "paragraph_id": "para_1468" }, { "text": "the victim’s assessment “was conducted at a children’s hospital", "paragraph_id": "para_1469" }, { "text": "rather than at a law enforcement center, and no law enforcement", "paragraph_id": "para_1470" }, { "text": "officer was present”); State v. Hilson, 829 N.W.2d 190 (Table), No.", "paragraph_id": "para_1471" }, { "text": "(continued . . .)", "paragraph_id": "para_1472" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_1473" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1474" }, { "text": "35", "paragraph_id": "para_1475" }, { "text": "¶111 Turning to the facts of this case, the absence of law", "paragraph_id": "para_1476", "court_paragraph": 35 }, { "text": "enforcement presence or involvement in Beth’s SANE exam weighs", "paragraph_id": "para_1477" }, { "text": "in favor of concluding that Beth’s statements to the nurse were", "paragraph_id": "para_1478" }, { "text": "nontestimonial. The defense’s SANE expert testified that law", "paragraph_id": "para_1479" }, { "text": "enforcement officers are not ordinarily present in the room during", "paragraph_id": "para_1480" }, { "text": "a SANE exam, and there is no evidence to suggest that the nurse", "paragraph_id": "para_1481" }, { "text": "deviated from that standard practice here. Nor is there any", "paragraph_id": "para_1482" }, { "text": "evidence that law enforcement officers directed the nurse in", "paragraph_id": "para_1483" }, { "text": "questioning Beth. Although law enforcement has been involved in", "paragraph_id": "para_1484" }, { "text": "the development and revision of Utah’s sexual assault examination", "paragraph_id": "para_1485" }, { "text": "report form, so have other stakeholders, including SANEs, the", "paragraph_id": "para_1486" }, { "text": "forensic laboratory, and the Utah Coalition Against Sexual Assault.", "paragraph_id": "para_1487" }, { "text": "Unlike those cases in which law enforcement played a direct role in", "paragraph_id": "para_1488" }, { "text": "the questioning, police were not directly involved in questioning", "paragraph_id": "para_1489" }, { "text": "Beth.", "paragraph_id": "para_1490" }, { "text": "2. Time Elapsed and Need for Medical Treatment", "paragraph_id": "para_1491" }, { "text": "¶112 Other courts have recognized that when the exam takes", "paragraph_id": "para_1492" }, { "text": "place after there is no longer a need for medical treatment, the", "paragraph_id": "para_1493" }, { "text": "questions asked during a SANE exam are more likely to be for the", "paragraph_id": "para_1494" }, { "text": "primary purpose of creating statements for use at trial. See, e.g.,", "paragraph_id": "para_1495" }, { "text": "Miller, 264 P.3d at 482 (“[W]hen there is little to no medical purpose", "paragraph_id": "para_1496" }, { "text": "for the examination and the interview is conducted by a sexual", "paragraph_id": "para_1497" }, { "text": "assault nurse primarily for forensic purposes, the conclusion is that", "paragraph_id": "para_1498" }, { "text": "the victim’s statements are testimonial.”). For example, in State v.", "paragraph_id": "para_1499" }, { "text": "Hooper, the Idaho Supreme Court held that a child victim’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1500" }, { "text": "statements to a nurse were testimonial because the nurse “did not", "paragraph_id": "para_1501" }, { "text": "ask any questions regarding [the victim’s] medical condition” and", "paragraph_id": "para_1502" }, { "text": "the nurse’s “interview took place after a medical assessment and", "paragraph_id": "para_1503" }, { "text": "separately from the medical assessment.” 176 P.3d 911, 917–18", "paragraph_id": "para_1504" }, { "text": "(Idaho 2007).", "paragraph_id": "para_1505" }, { "text": "¶113 Whether there is a medical need for the exam often", "paragraph_id": "para_1506" }, { "text": "depends on how much time has passed since the alleged assault. In", "paragraph_id": "para_1507" }, { "text": "State v. Romero, for instance, the New Mexico Supreme Court held", "paragraph_id": "para_1508" }, { "text": "that the victim’s statement during a SANE interview was", "paragraph_id": "para_1509" }, { "text": "testimonial, in part, because “the examination occurred several", "paragraph_id": "para_1510" }, { "text": "weeks after the assault.” 156 P.3d 694, 699 (N.M. 2007). Similarly,", "paragraph_id": "para_1511" }, { "text": "__________________________________________________________", "paragraph_id": "para_1512" }, { "text": "10-0665, 2013 WL 541621, at *2 (Iowa Ct. App. Feb. 13, 2013)", "paragraph_id": "para_1513" }, { "text": "(holding that statements made to a nurse were nontestimonial", "paragraph_id": "para_1514" }, { "text": "where “police were not present and did not provide questions for", "paragraph_id": "para_1515" }, { "text": "the nurse to ask”).", "paragraph_id": "para_1516" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_1517" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1518" }, { "text": "36", "paragraph_id": "para_1519" }, { "text": "in Hernandez v. State, the District Court of Appeal of Florida held", "paragraph_id": "para_1520", "court_paragraph": 36 }, { "text": "that a child victim’s statements to a nurse were testimonial, in part,", "paragraph_id": "para_1521" }, { "text": "because the “alleged sexual abuse had occurred one week earlier.”", "paragraph_id": "para_1522" }, { "text": "946 So. 2d 1270, 1271, 1282 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007). The court", "paragraph_id": "para_1523" }, { "text": "reasoned that the nurse’s questioning was not “to enable law", "paragraph_id": "para_1524" }, { "text": "enforcement to meet an ongoing emergency.” Id. Rather, the", "paragraph_id": "para_1525" }, { "text": "primary purpose “was to obtain facts about past events pertinent", "paragraph_id": "para_1526" }, { "text": "to the prosecution of [the defendant].” Id.10", "paragraph_id": "para_1527" }, { "text": "¶114 Conversely, if there is a need for immediate medical care", "paragraph_id": "para_1528" }, { "text": "and the questions asked are necessary for medical treatment,", "paragraph_id": "para_1529" }, { "text": "statements made to a SANE are less likely to be deemed", "paragraph_id": "para_1530" }, { "text": "testimonial. See, e.g., State v. Tsosie, 516 P.3d 1116, 1140 (N.M. 2022)", "paragraph_id": "para_1531" }, { "text": "(“[T]he close proximity in time of the SANE exam to the alleged", "paragraph_id": "para_1532" }, { "text": "predicate assault weighs toward a nontestimonial primary", "paragraph_id": "para_1533" }, { "text": "purpose.”); Miller, 264 P.3d at 482 (“[G]enerally where there is a", "paragraph_id": "para_1534" }, { "text": "clear medical purpose to the examination—often evidenced by the", "paragraph_id": "para_1535" }, { "text": "treating physician’s or nurse’s testimony that the question of ‘what", "paragraph_id": "para_1536" }, { "text": "happened’ was necessary for treatment of medical issues—the", "paragraph_id": "para_1537" }, { "text": "statements are nontestimonial even if there is a secondary purpose", "paragraph_id": "para_1538" }, { "text": "of preserving evidence.”). In particular, “a victim’s statement to a", "paragraph_id": "para_1539" }, { "text": "medical professional is more likely to be non-testimonial when the", "paragraph_id": "para_1540" }, { "text": "victim is examined in a hospital emergency room, where the", "paragraph_id": "para_1541" }, { "text": "medical necessity of the examination presumably is more", "paragraph_id": "para_1542" }, { "text": "pronounced.” Hill, 336 P.3d at 1287.", "paragraph_id": "para_1543" }, { "text": "¶115 For example, in State v. Slater, the Connecticut Supreme", "paragraph_id": "para_1544" }, { "text": "Court held that a victim’s statements to an emergency room", "paragraph_id": "para_1545" }, { "text": "physician and nurse who administered a rape kit were", "paragraph_id": "para_1546" }, { "text": "nontestimonial because the victim was in need of medical attention.", "paragraph_id": "para_1547" }, { "text": "939 A.2d 1105, 1119 (Conn. 2008). The court explained that “[a] rape", "paragraph_id": "para_1548" }, { "text": "victim is necessarily in need of medical attention” and that “[w]hen", "paragraph_id": "para_1549" }, { "text": "such a victim is brought to a hospital, even by the police, we expect", "paragraph_id": "para_1550" }, { "text": "__________________________________________________________", "paragraph_id": "para_1551" }, { "text": "10 See also People v. Spicer, 884 N.E.2d 675, 687 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007)", "paragraph_id": "para_1552" }, { "text": "(holding that a victim’s statement to a doctor was testimonial", "paragraph_id": "para_1553" }, { "text": "where “the victim had stated that she did not want to see a doctor", "paragraph_id": "para_1554" }, { "text": "and the police waited approximately seven hours before", "paragraph_id": "para_1555" }, { "text": "transporting her to a hospital”); cf. Commonwealth v. Howard, No.", "paragraph_id": "para_1556" }, { "text": "769 WDA 2016, 2017 WL 902257, at **3, 5 (Pa. Super. Ct. Mar. 7,", "paragraph_id": "para_1557" }, { "text": "2017) (holding that a child victim’s statements to a SANE were", "paragraph_id": "para_1558" }, { "text": "nontestimonial even though the exam occurred three days after her", "paragraph_id": "para_1559" }, { "text": "initial disclosure).", "paragraph_id": "para_1560" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_1561" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1562" }, { "text": "37", "paragraph_id": "para_1563" }, { "text": "that his or her most pressing concern is getting medical attention", "paragraph_id": "para_1564", "court_paragraph": 37 }, { "text": "and not providing a record of facts, despite the administration of a", "paragraph_id": "para_1565" }, { "text": "rape kit.” Id.11", "paragraph_id": "para_1566" }, { "text": "¶116 Here, Beth’s medical condition and the timing of the exam", "paragraph_id": "para_1567" }, { "text": "weigh in favor of concluding that her statements to the nurse were", "paragraph_id": "para_1568" }, { "text": "nontestimonial. Beth was allegedly raped near the hospital and", "paragraph_id": "para_1569" }, { "text": "walked into the emergency room shortly thereafter. This is not a", "paragraph_id": "para_1570" }, { "text": "case in which a victim later reports a sexual assault to the police", "paragraph_id": "para_1571" }, { "text": "and is then referred for a SANE exam for the purpose of creating", "paragraph_id": "para_1572" }, { "text": "evidence to use in prosecuting the crime. Beth sought medical", "paragraph_id": "para_1573" }, { "text": "treatment by going to the emergency room. When the exam started,", "paragraph_id": "para_1574" }, { "text": "Beth had only been at the hospital for about an hour and a half and", "paragraph_id": "para_1575" }, { "text": "had not yet received any medical treatment. The nurse found", "paragraph_id": "para_1576" }, { "text": "several injuries on Beth’s face, head, chest, back, arm, leg, and", "paragraph_id": "para_1577" }, { "text": "buttocks and administered the medications Beth needed. The", "paragraph_id": "para_1578" }, { "text": "timing of the exam and Beth’s desire for medical treatment support", "paragraph_id": "para_1579" }, { "text": "the conclusion that the primary purpose of the exam was to care for", "paragraph_id": "para_1580" }, { "text": "her medical needs, whereas the forensic purpose was secondary.", "paragraph_id": "para_1581" }, { "text": "3. Formality of the Exchange", "paragraph_id": "para_1582" }, { "text": "¶117 The Confrontation Clause is primarily concerned with the", "paragraph_id": "para_1583" }, { "text": "use of out-of-court statements “in which state actors are involved", "paragraph_id": "para_1584" }, { "text": "in a formal, out-of-court interrogation of a witness to obtain", "paragraph_id": "para_1585" }, { "text": "__________________________________________________________", "paragraph_id": "para_1586" }, { "text": "11 See also Tsosie, 516 P.3d at 1140–41 (holding that where a SANE", "paragraph_id": "para_1587" }, { "text": "exam “occurred in the same night as the alleged assault” the", "paragraph_id": "para_1588" }, { "text": "“timing circumstance supports the primary purpose of the SANE", "paragraph_id": "para_1589" }, { "text": "exam being nontestimonial”); Burke, 478 P.3d at 1111 (holding that", "paragraph_id": "para_1590" }, { "text": "“nearly all of the [victim’s] statements” were nontestimonial", "paragraph_id": "para_1591" }, { "text": "because she “made these statements in a medical exam room in a", "paragraph_id": "para_1592" }, { "text": "hospital” and “[s]he needed medical treatment specific to her", "paragraph_id": "para_1593" }, { "text": "sexual assault, which [the nurse] provided”); Thompson, 438 P.3d at", "paragraph_id": "para_1594" }, { "text": "378 (holding that a victim’s statements to a SANE were", "paragraph_id": "para_1595" }, { "text": "nontestimonial where the “exam was performed in the emergency", "paragraph_id": "para_1596" }, { "text": "room once [the victim’s] pain was under control” and “a portion of", "paragraph_id": "para_1597" }, { "text": "the exam was devoted to treating the issues associated with the", "paragraph_id": "para_1598" }, { "text": "assault”); Bowers v. Ames, No. 20-0625, 2022 WL 123507, at *10 (W.", "paragraph_id": "para_1599" }, { "text": "Va. Jan. 12, 2022) (holding that a victim’s statements were", "paragraph_id": "para_1600" }, { "text": "nontestimonial where it was “undisputed that the victim was", "paragraph_id": "para_1601" }, { "text": "physically injured and in need of medical assistance,” “the victim", "paragraph_id": "para_1602" }, { "text": "ultimately received three sutures to repair a tear,” and “the victim’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1603" }, { "text": "statements to the SANE nurse facilitated her treatment”).", "paragraph_id": "para_1604" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_1605" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1606" }, { "text": "38", "paragraph_id": "para_1607" }, { "text": "evidence for trial.”12 Bryant, 562 U.S. at 358. If an exchange between", "paragraph_id": "para_1608", "court_paragraph": 38 }, { "text": "an alleged victim and a SANE is formal—meaning that it presents", "paragraph_id": "para_1609" }, { "text": "like a structured interview, is videotaped, or uses specific forms or", "paragraph_id": "para_1610" }, { "text": "official reports—the victim’s statements are more likely to be", "paragraph_id": "para_1611" }, { "text": "deemed testimonial. See id. at 366.", "paragraph_id": "para_1612" }, { "text": "¶118 For example, in People v. Vargas, the California Court of", "paragraph_id": "para_1613" }, { "text": "Appeal held that a victim’s statements to a nurse were testimonial", "paragraph_id": "para_1614" }, { "text": "because they “occurred under circumstances that imparted, to", "paragraph_id": "para_1615" }, { "text": "some degree, the formality and solemnity characteristic of", "paragraph_id": "para_1616" }, { "text": "testimony.” 178 Cal. App. 4th 647, 660–62 (2009) (cleaned up). The", "paragraph_id": "para_1617" }, { "text": "court explained that the nurse questioned the victim “according to", "paragraph_id": "para_1618" }, { "text": "a rigorous, statutorily mandated format designed to have [the", "paragraph_id": "para_1619" }, { "text": "victim] describe the specific sexual acts which she was forced to", "paragraph_id": "para_1620" }, { "text": "perform.” Id. at 661. The nurse was also required to complete a", "paragraph_id": "para_1621" }, { "text": "mandatory form, which explained that “a separate medical", "paragraph_id": "para_1622" }, { "text": "examination for evidence of sexual assault at public expense would", "paragraph_id": "para_1623" }, { "text": "be conducted by a physician to discover and preserve evidence of", "paragraph_id": "para_1624" }, { "text": "the assault,” that the nurse would ask about several categories of", "paragraph_id": "para_1625" }, { "text": "sexual assault, and that “the report of the examination and any", "paragraph_id": "para_1626" }, { "text": "evidence obtained will be released to law enforcement authorities.”", "paragraph_id": "para_1627" }, { "text": "Id. at 655 (cleaned up); see also Bennington, 264 P.3d at 454–55", "paragraph_id": "para_1628" }, { "text": "(holding that the victim’s statement to a SANE was testimonial, in", "paragraph_id": "para_1629" }, { "text": "part, because “the statement was given in a formal setting,” using", "paragraph_id": "para_1630" }, { "text": "a questionnaire and procedures dictated by state agencies).", "paragraph_id": "para_1631" }, { "text": "¶119 In this case, the nurse’s examination of Beth was guided", "paragraph_id": "para_1632" }, { "text": "by a seventeen-page standardized form. If the protocol the nurse", "paragraph_id": "para_1633" }, { "text": "followed made the examination objectively more formal than a", "paragraph_id": "para_1634" }, { "text": "sexual assault examination by a nurse who was not certified as a", "paragraph_id": "para_1635" }, { "text": "SANE, there was no evidence to that effect. To the contrary, the", "paragraph_id": "para_1636" }, { "text": "nurse testified that SANEs do the “same things” that an emergency", "paragraph_id": "para_1637" }, { "text": "doctor would do when examining an alleged victim of sexual", "paragraph_id": "para_1638" }, { "text": "assault and that some of the information on the form would be", "paragraph_id": "para_1639" }, { "text": "noted “with any chart.” The very circumstances that make SANE", "paragraph_id": "para_1640" }, { "text": "exams “more formal are those that also lend credence to the", "paragraph_id": "para_1641" }, { "text": "medical purpose—the taking and recording of a medical history", "paragraph_id": "para_1642" }, { "text": "__________________________________________________________", "paragraph_id": "para_1643" }, { "text": "12 The United States Supreme Court has recognized that “at least", "paragraph_id": "para_1644" }, { "text": "some statements to individuals who are not law enforcement", "paragraph_id": "para_1645" }, { "text": "officers could conceivably raise confrontation concerns,” and has", "paragraph_id": "para_1646" }, { "text": "“decline[d] to adopt a categorical rule excluding them from the", "paragraph_id": "para_1647" }, { "text": "Sixth Amendment’s reach.” Ohio v. Clark, 576 U.S. 237, 246 (2015).", "paragraph_id": "para_1648" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_1649" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1650" }, { "text": "39", "paragraph_id": "para_1651" }, { "text": "before treatment.” Miller, 264 P.3d at 489. Viewed from the", "paragraph_id": "para_1652", "court_paragraph": 39 }, { "text": "perspective of an objective participant, the formality attendant to", "paragraph_id": "para_1653" }, { "text": "the exam is not markedly different from a standard medical exam", "paragraph_id": "para_1654" }, { "text": "where the provider takes a history and notes the patient’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1655" }, { "text": "responses in the chart. As a result, the level of formality tells us little", "paragraph_id": "para_1656" }, { "text": "about whether the primary purpose of the exam is for medical", "paragraph_id": "para_1657" }, { "text": "treatment or to aid the criminal prosecution.", "paragraph_id": "para_1658" }, { "text": "4. The Statements and Actions of the Participants", "paragraph_id": "para_1659" }, { "text": "¶120 An alleged victim’s statement to a SANE is more likely to", "paragraph_id": "para_1660" }, { "text": "be deemed testimonial if it was made “under circumstances which", "paragraph_id": "para_1661" }, { "text": "would lead an objective witness reasonably to believe that the", "paragraph_id": "para_1662" }, { "text": "statement would be available for use at a later trial.” Crawford v.", "paragraph_id": "para_1663" }, { "text": "Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 52 (2004) (cleaned up). But if “an", "paragraph_id": "para_1664" }, { "text": "objectively reasonable person in the declarant’s position would not", "paragraph_id": "para_1665" }, { "text": "have believed that his statements to the [SANE] would be available", "paragraph_id": "para_1666" }, { "text": "for use at a later trial,” the statement is less likely to be deemed", "paragraph_id": "para_1667" }, { "text": "testimonial. See Vigil, 127 P.3d at 924, 926.", "paragraph_id": "para_1668" }, { "text": "¶121 Where the SANE advises the alleged victim that the", "paragraph_id": "para_1669" }, { "text": "examination is not for the purposes of medical treatment, a", "paragraph_id": "para_1670" }, { "text": "reasonable observer would understand that the primary purpose", "paragraph_id": "para_1671" }, { "text": "of collecting statements is to aid in the prosecution of the offense.", "paragraph_id": "para_1672" }, { "text": "For example, the Montana Supreme Court has held that a victim’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1673" }, { "text": "statements to a SANE were testimonial where “the SANE", "paragraph_id": "para_1674" }, { "text": "examination consent form has the patient attest to the fact that they", "paragraph_id": "para_1675" }, { "text": "‘understand that this is not a routine medical checkup.’” State v.", "paragraph_id": "para_1676" }, { "text": "Martinez, 545 P.3d 652, 660–61 (Mont. 2023). The consent form", "paragraph_id": "para_1677" }, { "text": "“indicate[d] that the examination [was] done, in part, to ‘collect", "paragraph_id": "para_1678" }, { "text": "evidence,’ take photographs ‘to be used as evidence,’ and ‘release", "paragraph_id": "para_1679" }, { "text": "evidence collected and information obtained to law enforcement.’”", "paragraph_id": "para_1680" }, { "text": "Id. at 661 (cleaned up). And it “specifically state[d] that the", "paragraph_id": "para_1681" }, { "text": "examiner will not be held responsible for identifying, diagnosing,", "paragraph_id": "para_1682" }, { "text": "or treating any existing medical problems.” Id. (cleaned up).", "paragraph_id": "para_1683" }, { "text": "¶122 In contrast, in State v. Stahl, the Ohio Supreme Court held", "paragraph_id": "para_1684" }, { "text": "that a victim’s statement to a nurse practitioner was nontestimonial", "paragraph_id": "para_1685" }, { "text": "because the victim “could have reasonably believed that . . . the", "paragraph_id": "para_1686" }, { "text": "statement would be used primarily for health-care purposes.” 855", "paragraph_id": "para_1687" }, { "text": "N.E.2d 834, 846 (Ohio 2006). The victim had already given a", "paragraph_id": "para_1688" }, { "text": "statement to an officer at the police station prior to her exam. Id. at", "paragraph_id": "para_1689" }, { "text": "845. When she arrived for the exam, she signed a consent form that", "paragraph_id": "para_1690" }, { "text": "stated, “I authorize the release of evidence, information (including", "paragraph_id": "para_1691" }, { "text": "protected health information), clothing, colposcope photos, and", "paragraph_id": "para_1692" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_1693" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1694" }, { "text": "40", "paragraph_id": "para_1695" }, { "text": "photography documentation of injuries to a law enforcement", "paragraph_id": "para_1696", "court_paragraph": 40 }, { "text": "agency for use only in the investigation and prosecution of this", "paragraph_id": "para_1697" }, { "text": "crime.” Id. at 837. The court drew a distinction between the victim’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1698" }, { "text": "expectations with regard to the physical evidence and her", "paragraph_id": "para_1699" }, { "text": "statements: “This wording would naturally create a reasonable", "paragraph_id": "para_1700" }, { "text": "belief that the [examining] unit will release physical evidence to the", "paragraph_id": "para_1701" }, { "text": "police and any information resulting from the physical", "paragraph_id": "para_1702" }, { "text": "examination. But to a reasonable person, questioning by a nurse or", "paragraph_id": "para_1703" }, { "text": "other medical professional during an emergency-room", "paragraph_id": "para_1704" }, { "text": "examination would appear to serve a primarily health-care-related", "paragraph_id": "para_1705" }, { "text": "function.” Id. at 846.", "paragraph_id": "para_1706" }, { "text": "¶123 Turning to the facts of Najera’s case, there is no evidence", "paragraph_id": "para_1707" }, { "text": "that Beth was told that her statements would be turned over to law", "paragraph_id": "para_1708" }, { "text": "enforcement. Beth gave the nurse consent to share the evidence", "paragraph_id": "para_1709" }, { "text": "collected during the exam with law enforcement, which might lead", "paragraph_id": "para_1710" }, { "text": "a reasonable observer to believe that collecting physical evidence", "paragraph_id": "para_1711" }, { "text": "and documenting Beth’s injuries were for the primary purpose of", "paragraph_id": "para_1712" }, { "text": "gathering evidence for trial. But we agree with the Ohio Supreme", "paragraph_id": "para_1713" }, { "text": "Court that this would not have informed a reasonable observer that", "paragraph_id": "para_1714" }, { "text": "statements to the nurse could be used in a future prosecution.", "paragraph_id": "para_1715" }, { "text": "¶124 The totality of the circumstances would suggest to a", "paragraph_id": "para_1716" }, { "text": "reasonable observer that the question-and-answer part of the exam", "paragraph_id": "para_1717" }, { "text": "was for the primary purpose of providing medical treatment. At", "paragraph_id": "para_1718" }, { "text": "the beginning of the exam, the nurse told Beth that she would “do", "paragraph_id": "para_1719" }, { "text": "an exam . . . to just look for any injuries and be able to address any", "paragraph_id": "para_1720" }, { "text": "injuries” and would “ask some questions that will help guide [the]", "paragraph_id": "para_1721" }, { "text": "exam.” The nurse told Beth that she would “treat with medications", "paragraph_id": "para_1722" }, { "text": "or do x-rays or anything that might seem necessary towards the", "paragraph_id": "para_1723" }, { "text": "end.” This exchange would lead a reasonable participant to believe", "paragraph_id": "para_1724" }, { "text": "that the primary purpose of eliciting Beth’s statements was for", "paragraph_id": "para_1725" }, { "text": "medical treatment, not “to establish or prove past events", "paragraph_id": "para_1726" }, { "text": "potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution.” See Davis, 547", "paragraph_id": "para_1727" }, { "text": "U.S. at 822.", "paragraph_id": "para_1728" }, { "text": "¶125 In sum, there is no doubt that the nurse posed questions", "paragraph_id": "para_1729" }, { "text": "to Beth, in part, because the form called for those answers. But as", "paragraph_id": "para_1730" }, { "text": "discussed in the following section, the nurse testified that each of", "paragraph_id": "para_1731" }, { "text": "those questions also had a medical purpose. Viewed objectively,", "paragraph_id": "para_1732" }, { "text": "the primary purpose of collecting a history from Beth was to", "paragraph_id": "para_1733" }, { "text": "provide appropriate medical treatment, not to create an out-of-", "paragraph_id": "para_1734" }, { "text": "court substitute for her testimony. Therefore, the district court", "paragraph_id": "para_1735" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_1736" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1737" }, { "text": "41", "paragraph_id": "para_1738" }, { "text": "correctly ruled that the statements are not inadmissible under the", "paragraph_id": "para_1739", "court_paragraph": 41 }, { "text": "Confrontation Clause.13", "paragraph_id": "para_1740" }, { "text": "B. Beth’s Statements to the Nurse Are Admissible Hearsay", "paragraph_id": "para_1741" }, { "text": "Because They Were Made for Medical Diagnosis or", "paragraph_id": "para_1742" }, { "text": "Treatment", "paragraph_id": "para_1743" }, { "text": "¶126 Najera also argues that the district court erred when it", "paragraph_id": "para_1744" }, { "text": "determined that Beth’s statements to the nurse, as documented in", "paragraph_id": "para_1745" }, { "text": "the SANE report, were admissible as statements for medical", "paragraph_id": "para_1746" }, { "text": "diagnosis or treatment under rule 803(4) of the Utah Rules of", "paragraph_id": "para_1747" }, { "text": "Evidence. This rule provides an exception to the rule against", "paragraph_id": "para_1748" }, { "text": "hearsay for statements made for medical diagnosis or treatment.", "paragraph_id": "para_1749" }, { "text": "UTAH R. EVID. 803(4). “Such statements carry a guarantee of", "paragraph_id": "para_1750" }, { "text": "trustworthiness” because a patient has a “strong motivation to be", "paragraph_id": "para_1751" }, { "text": "truthful when discussing his or her medical condition with a", "paragraph_id": "para_1752" }, { "text": "doctor.” Hansen v. Heath, 852 P.2d 977, 979 (Utah 1993) (cleaned up),", "paragraph_id": "para_1753" }, { "text": "superseded on other grounds by statute as stated in Lancer Ins. Co. v. Lake", "paragraph_id": "para_1754" }, { "text": "Shore Motor Coach Lines, Inc., 2017 UT 8, 391 P.3d 218.", "paragraph_id": "para_1755" }, { "text": "¶127 Rule 803(4) defines these statements as those that are", "paragraph_id": "para_1756" }, { "text": "“made for—and [are] reasonably pertinent to—medical diagnosis", "paragraph_id": "para_1757" }, { "text": "or treatment; and describe[] medical history; past or present", "paragraph_id": "para_1758" }, { "text": "symptoms or sensations; their inception; or their general cause.”", "paragraph_id": "para_1759" }, { "text": "UTAH R. EVID. 803(4)(A)–(B). To be admissible under this rule, a", "paragraph_id": "para_1760" }, { "text": "statement “must satisfy two elements: (1) [t]he statement must be", "paragraph_id": "para_1761" }, { "text": "made with an intent to facilitate medical diagnosis or treatment,", "paragraph_id": "para_1762" }, { "text": "__________________________________________________________", "paragraph_id": "para_1763" }, { "text": "13 We note that some courts have parsed the victim’s statements", "paragraph_id": "para_1764" }, { "text": "during a SANE exam to determine whether the primary purpose of", "paragraph_id": "para_1765" }, { "text": "particular statements was testimonial. See, e.g., Burke, 478 P.3d at", "paragraph_id": "para_1766" }, { "text": "1108–15 (holding that a victim’s “description of the assailant” was", "paragraph_id": "para_1767" }, { "text": "testimonial but other statements were nontestimonial). In front of", "paragraph_id": "para_1768" }, { "text": "the district court, Najera fought the admission of all the statements", "paragraph_id": "para_1769" }, { "text": "Beth made during the SANE exam. Similarly, on appeal, Najera has", "paragraph_id": "para_1770" }, { "text": "not attempted to parse the statements but instead argues that the", "paragraph_id": "para_1771" }, { "text": "nature of Utah’s SANE exam renders all statements made during", "paragraph_id": "para_1772" }, { "text": "the exam testimonial. Accordingly, we have analyzed the SANE", "paragraph_id": "para_1773" }, { "text": "exam as a whole to determine whether the statements elicited were", "paragraph_id": "para_1774" }, { "text": "primarily for a testimonial purpose. We express no view on", "paragraph_id": "para_1775" }, { "text": "whether or when it might be appropriate to separately analyze", "paragraph_id": "para_1776" }, { "text": "parts of the same exchange to determine primary purpose.", "paragraph_id": "para_1777" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_1778" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1779" }, { "text": "42", "paragraph_id": "para_1780" }, { "text": "and (2) the statement must in fact be reasonably pertinent to", "paragraph_id": "para_1781", "court_paragraph": 42 }, { "text": "diagnosis or treatment.” Hansen, 852 P.2d at 979.", "paragraph_id": "para_1782" }, { "text": "¶128 When assessing “whether the proffered statements were", "paragraph_id": "para_1783" }, { "text": "‘reasonably pertinent’ to the medical provider’s diagnosis and", "paragraph_id": "para_1784" }, { "text": "treatment tasks,” the medical provider’s “assessment of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1785" }, { "text": "significance of the statements to diagnosis and treatment will", "paragraph_id": "para_1786" }, { "text": "weigh heavily in the analysis.” 30B WRIGHT & MILLER’S FEDERAL", "paragraph_id": "para_1787" }, { "text": "PRACTICE & PROCEDURE § 6845, Westlaw (database updated Sept.", "paragraph_id": "para_1788" }, { "text": "2025). While “this presumption can give way when the medical", "paragraph_id": "para_1789" }, { "text": "professional has some other role, such as working with a police or", "paragraph_id": "para_1790" }, { "text": "prosecution team to generate evidence,” “courts have proven", "paragraph_id": "para_1791" }, { "text": "hesitant to exclude statements that serve a medical purpose even if", "paragraph_id": "para_1792" }, { "text": "they also serve an investigative one.” Id.; see also State v. Miller, 2023", "paragraph_id": "para_1793" }, { "text": "UT App 85, ¶ 63, 535 P.3d 390 (“Utah courts have repeatedly held", "paragraph_id": "para_1794" }, { "text": "that statements by rape victims made to medical providers", "paragraph_id": "para_1795" }, { "text": "describing their abuse are admissible under rule 803(4).” (cleaned", "paragraph_id": "para_1796" }, { "text": "up)).", "paragraph_id": "para_1797" }, { "text": "¶129 The district court did not abuse its discretion in ruling that", "paragraph_id": "para_1798" }, { "text": "Beth’s statements to the nurse, as documented in the SANE report,", "paragraph_id": "para_1799" }, { "text": "were admissible under rule 803(4). When Najera objected to the", "paragraph_id": "para_1800" }, { "text": "admission of Beth’s statements to the nurse, he “objected generally", "paragraph_id": "para_1801" }, { "text": "and not specifically to individual statements in the nurse report.”", "paragraph_id": "para_1802" }, { "text": "The district court accordingly addressed the admissibility of these", "paragraph_id": "para_1803" }, { "text": "statements in their entirety, and it concluded that the “statements", "paragraph_id": "para_1804" }, { "text": "[were] made for the purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment", "paragraph_id": "para_1805" }, { "text": "under [r]ule 803(4).”", "paragraph_id": "para_1806" }, { "text": "¶130 The evidence supported the district court’s conclusion.", "paragraph_id": "para_1807" }, { "text": "The nurse testified that the “mission” of a SANE is to “medically", "paragraph_id": "para_1808" }, { "text": "support patients who have reported violence” and that the", "paragraph_id": "para_1809" }, { "text": "questions posed to the victim help guide the exam. The defense’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1810" }, { "text": "SANE expert also testified that the medical objectives of a SANE", "paragraph_id": "para_1811" }, { "text": "exam “are to provide nursing care, identify injury, collect evidence,", "paragraph_id": "para_1812" }, { "text": "provide follow-up services, refer for further assessment by a", "paragraph_id": "para_1813" }, { "text": "healthcare provider if necessary, and to complete documentation.”", "paragraph_id": "para_1814" }, { "text": "¶131 At one of the evidentiary hearings, the nurse testified", "paragraph_id": "para_1815" }, { "text": "about the purpose of nearly every question and answer in her", "paragraph_id": "para_1816" }, { "text": "report, explaining that their purpose was “to address the possibility", "paragraph_id": "para_1817" }, { "text": "of injuries, pregnancy, and sexually transmitted diseases.” The", "paragraph_id": "para_1818" }, { "text": "nurse testified that certain information on the first page of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1819" }, { "text": "report—the date and time of the exam as well as the patient’s date", "paragraph_id": "para_1820" }, { "text": "of birth, age, complaint, and medical history—is relevant to", "paragraph_id": "para_1821" }, { "text": "Cite as: 2025 UT 61", "paragraph_id": "para_1822" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1823" }, { "text": "43", "paragraph_id": "para_1824" }, { "text": "medical diagnosis or treatment because a nurse would note that", "paragraph_id": "para_1825", "court_paragraph": 43 }, { "text": "information “with any chart.” The date, time, location, and", "paragraph_id": "para_1826" }, { "text": "summary of the alleged assault are relevant to medical diagnosis or", "paragraph_id": "para_1827" }, { "text": "treatment because this information helps the nurse assess “the", "paragraph_id": "para_1828" }, { "text": "injuries” and whether the patient is in the “window” for certain", "paragraph_id": "para_1829" }, { "text": "medications, namely “antibiotics” and “pregnancy prophylaxis.”", "paragraph_id": "para_1830" }, { "text": "Whether the alleged perpetrator was a stranger or a partner is", "paragraph_id": "para_1831" }, { "text": "“important” to medical diagnosis or treatment for “multiple", "paragraph_id": "para_1832" }, { "text": "reasons” because the patient might have contracted a “sexually", "paragraph_id": "para_1833" }, { "text": "transmitted infection[]” from a stranger or “if she lives with that", "paragraph_id": "para_1834" }, { "text": "person, it could be a safety issue.” The patient’s actions and the", "paragraph_id": "para_1835" }, { "text": "suspect’s actions are relevant to medical diagnosis or treatment", "paragraph_id": "para_1836" }, { "text": "because they can explain “injury” and “trauma.” Because Beth", "paragraph_id": "para_1837" }, { "text": "reported feeling strange after the suspect gave her some water, it", "paragraph_id": "para_1838" }, { "text": "was “important” to know “what kind of drugs could be in her", "paragraph_id": "para_1839" }, { "text": "system and address her health that way, if needed.” And, finally,", "paragraph_id": "para_1840" }, { "text": "the history in the strangulation report is relevant to medical", "paragraph_id": "para_1841" }, { "text": "diagnosis or treatment because strangulation “can be life-", "paragraph_id": "para_1842" }, { "text": "threatening” so the nurse needs to “know how severe it was” so", "paragraph_id": "para_1843" }, { "text": "that a physician could order a “CAT scan” if necessary.", "paragraph_id": "para_1844" }, { "text": "¶132 On appeal, Najera has made an effort to parse Beth’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1845" }, { "text": "statements, arguing that the “statements related to the identity of", "paragraph_id": "para_1846" }, { "text": "the perpetrator were not” related to medical diagnosis or", "paragraph_id": "para_1847" }, { "text": "treatment. Najera focuses on two details noted in the “Summary of", "paragraph_id": "para_1848" }, { "text": "Assault” section of the SANE report—the description of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1849" }, { "text": "suspect’s clothing and the fact that he had a tattoo. These details", "paragraph_id": "para_1850" }, { "text": "were also included in another section of the SANE report,", "paragraph_id": "para_1851" }, { "text": "“Suspect’s Dress During Assault.” The State indicated at one of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1852" }, { "text": "evidentiary hearings that it was not attempting to admit that", "paragraph_id": "para_1853" }, { "text": "portion of the report. We assume that the State’s rationale for not", "paragraph_id": "para_1854" }, { "text": "admitting the “Suspect’s Dress During Assault” portion of the", "paragraph_id": "para_1855" }, { "text": "report would extend to the same details as recounted in the", "paragraph_id": "para_1856" }, { "text": "“Summary of Assault” section of the report. But if the State", "paragraph_id": "para_1857" }, { "text": "attempts to offer these details at trial, the defense can make a more", "paragraph_id": "para_1858" }, { "text": "specific objection to their admission at that time.", "paragraph_id": "para_1859" }, { "text": "¶133 In the face of a blanket objection to Beth’s statements to", "paragraph_id": "para_1860" }, { "text": "the nurse under rule 803(4), the district court did not abuse its", "paragraph_id": "para_1861" }, { "text": "discretion in concluding that Beth’s statements in the SANE report", "paragraph_id": "para_1862" }, { "text": "were admissible. The nurse explained how nearly every question", "paragraph_id": "para_1863" }, { "text": "and answer in her report was “reasonably pertinent to diagnosis or", "paragraph_id": "para_1864" }, { "text": "treatment.” Hansen, 852 P.2d at 979. Accordingly, we affirm the", "paragraph_id": "para_1865" }, { "text": "STATE v. NAJERA", "paragraph_id": "para_1866" }, { "text": "Opinion of the Court", "paragraph_id": "para_1867" }, { "text": "44", "paragraph_id": "para_1868" }, { "text": "district court’s ruling granting the State’s motion in limine to admit", "paragraph_id": "para_1869", "court_paragraph": 44 }, { "text": "those statements.", "paragraph_id": "para_1870" }, { "text": "CONCLUSION", "paragraph_id": "para_1871" }, { "text": "¶134 The district court correctly concluded that Beth’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1872" }, { "text": "statements to both the officer and the nurse are nontestimonial and", "paragraph_id": "para_1873" }, { "text": "therefore do not implicate the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation", "paragraph_id": "para_1874" }, { "text": "Clause. And the district court did not abuse its discretion in", "paragraph_id": "para_1875" }, { "text": "concluding that these statements fall within the hearsay exceptions", "paragraph_id": "para_1876" }, { "text": "for excited utterances and statements made for purposes of medical", "paragraph_id": "para_1877" }, { "text": "diagnosis or treatment, respectively. Accordingly, we affirm the", "paragraph_id": "para_1878" }, { "text": "court’s ruling granting the State’s motions in limine to admit Beth’s", "paragraph_id": "para_1879" }, { "text": "statements at trial.", "paragraph_id": "para_1880" } ], "word_count": 17773, "cites": [ "541\nU.S. 36", "576 U.S. 237", "562 U.S. 344", "547 U.S. 813", "576\nU.S. 237", "541 U.S. 36" ], "cited_by": [], "sha256": "afd160eb30f486ec0002b864af743e24d4f1bcd2a5bac0bd0e1b9b08c109f083", "source_url": "https://legacy.utcourts.gov/opinions/supopin/State v. Najera20251128.pdf", "fetched_at": "2026-10-10T03:05:24.918+00:00", "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/utah-case-no-20230983-2025-11-28", "risk_graph": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:utah-case-no-20230983-2025-11-28", "relations_graph": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:utah-case-no-20230983-2025-11-28", "changes": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes", "agent": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:utah-case-no-20230983-2025-11-28", "verification": { "stored_sha256": "afd160eb30f486ec0002b864af743e24d4f1bcd2a5bac0bd0e1b9b08c109f083", "recomputed_sha256": "afd160eb30f486ec0002b864af743e24d4f1bcd2a5bac0bd0e1b9b08c109f083", "intact": true, "checked_at": "2026-10-12T17:10:03.097Z" } }, "hash": "sha256:339e6141be2cf8ef5d669fd5e134f524ffeabcf4267ae6474b3507422a6557c1", "version": "legal-2026-10-12", "expires": "2026-10-13T00:00:00.000Z", "dependency": { "index_version": "legal-2026-10-12+legal-2026-10-12+2026-10-12T16:03:48", "content_hash": "sha256:339e6141be2cf8ef5d669fd5e134f524ffeabcf4267ae6474b3507422a6557c1", "revalidate_after": "2026-10-12T18:10:03.687Z", "max_copy_age_seconds": 3600, "policy": "revalidate-required; attribution-preferred", "changelog": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency", "verify": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify", "stale_copy_invalid": true }, "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:utah-case-no-20230983-2025-11-28", "follow": [ { "rel": "risk", "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:utah-case-no-20230983-2025-11-28" }, { "rel": "relations", "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:utah-case-no-20230983-2025-11-28" }, { "rel": "agent", "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:utah-case-no-20230983-2025-11-28" }, { "rel": "obligations", "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain" }, { "rel": "changes", "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=us" } ], "disclaimer": "Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.", "content_notice": { "legal_advice": false, "nature": "Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.", "kinds": { "official_text": "Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted", "summary": "Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text", "classification": "Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer" }, "rule": "Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.", "report_error": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections", "ai_act_declaration": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration" }, "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering", "access_class": "public", "access_view": "public" }