Are Statements Made to a Sex Abuse Investigator Adimissible Under the Hearsay Exception ?
In State v. Dines (Nov. 1, 1990), Cuyahoga App. No. 57661, 1990 Ohio App, the Court found that statements made to a sex abuse investigator were admissible under the hearsay exception in Evid.R.803(4).
In Dines, the sex abuse investigator had a bachelor's degree, but was not a licensed social worker at the time of her interview with the victim.
She testified that her function was to "interview purportedly abused children and to insure their safety, as well as to ascertain their emotional and medical needs." Id.
The sex abuse investigator would then "relay the information to the appropriate medical personnel to diagnose and treat the child." Id.
The Court held in Dines that:
"[T]he testimony of a social worker who examines child victims of sexual abuse is an exception to the rule against hearsay pursuant to Evid.R. 803(4); State v. Nelson (Jan. 19, 1989), Cuyahoga App. No. 54905, 1989 Ohio App, unreported; State v. Smigelski (Nov. 17, 1988), Cuyahoga App. No. 54532, 1988 Ohio App. Cf. State v. Boston (1989), 46 Ohio St.3d 108, 545 N.E.2d 1220 (where child's statements admitted through experts rendering opinions and where statements were used to identify one perpetrator)." Id.