No. 04-05-00395-CR
Delivered and Filed: February 1, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Appeal from the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, Trial Court No. 2002-CR-6020, Honorable Sharon MacRae, Judge Presiding. Affirmed.
Sitting: Catherine STONE, Justice, Karen ANGELINI, Justice, Sandee Bryan MARION, Justice.
Opinion by: SANDEE BRYAN MARION, Justice.
A jury found defendant, Lloyd Lawrence, guilty on three counts of indecency with a child. The trial court assessed punishment at life in prison. On appeal, defendant asserts the trial court erred by allowing into evidence the testimony of a State's witness. We affirm.
DISCUSSION
At trial, the State offered the testimony of Dr. Nancy Kellogg, who is a pediatrician associated with the Alamo Children's Advocacy Center. Dr. Kellogg testified about an outcry statement made by the complainant when Dr. Kellogg examined the child eight days after the offense. On appeal, defendant asserts Dr. Kellogg's testimony was inadmissible because the child's statements to her were "self-serving belated hearsay" given in preparation of litigation and not for the purpose of medical diagnosis or treatment. The record, however, does not support this argument. The purpose of a sexual assault examination is to ascertain whether the child has been sexually abused and to determine whether further medical attention is needed. See Beheler v. State, 3 S.W.3d 182, 189 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1999, pet. ref'd). "Thus, statements describing acts of sexual abuse are pertinent to the victim's medical diagnosis and treatment." Id. An exception is made to the hearsay rule for "[s]tatements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment and describing medical history, or past or present symptoms, pain, or sensations, or the inception or general character of the cause or external source thereof insofar as reasonably pertinent to diagnosis or treatment." Tex. R. Evid. 803(4). Dr. Kellogg explained that a sexual assault examination has four distinct parts, the first of which involves obtaining the child's medical history. During this part of the exam, the clinician asks the child for information about what happened. Dr. Kellogg said this information guides the clinician in determining the type of examination and testing that is necessary for diagnostic purposes and the type of treatment that is best for the child. Dr. Kellogg said she took the complainant's medical history to determine the appropriate diagnostic test and treatment for the child, and she performed a head-to-toe physical examination of the complainant. Dr. Kellogg told the jury about her conversation with the complainant, including the child's statements about where and how defendant had touched her. We conclude the complainant's out-of-court statements regarding defendant's conduct were made for the purpose of medical diagnosis and treatment. Because the statements were properly admitted under Rule 803(4), the trial court did not err in admitting Dr. Kellogg's testimony into evidence. We overrule defendant's issue and affirm the trial court's judgment.