In re Emilee K. In re Jennifer K (2017)

“It is well settled that the clear and convincing standard is ‘a higher standard of proof than that of a fair preponderance of the evidence but less than that required for proof beyond a reasonable doubt.’” In re Sophia M., 204 A.3d 605, 609 (R.I. 2019) (quoting In re Emilee K., 153 A.3d 487, 497 (R.I. 2017)).

Review of the trial court’s decision is limited to determining whether the trial court abused its discretion.” In re Emilee K., 153 A.3d 487, 494 (R.I. 2017) (quoting State v. Mallett, 600 A.2d 273, 276 (R.I. 1991)).

Although this Court has never been hypercritical in our interpretation or application of Rule 803(4), In re Emilee K., 153 A.3d 487, 495 (R.I. 2017), “when the statements made are merely to assign fault or to narrate details that are not connected with diagnosis or treatment, they are inadmissible hearsay if they do not fall within any other hearsay exception.” State v. Veluzat, 578 A.2d 93, 96 (R.I. 1990).

Although this Court has never been hypercritical in our interpretation or application of Rule 803(4), In re Emilee K., 153 A.3d 487, 495 (R.I. 2017), “when the statements made are merely to assign fault or to narrate details that are not connected with diagnosis or treatment, they are inadmissible hearsay if they do not fall within any other hearsay exception.” State v. Veluzat, 578 A.2d 93, 96 (R.I. 1990).

See, e.g., Barros, 148 A.3d at 172 . - 21 - court’s decision is limited to determining whether the trial court abused its discretion.” State v. Doyle, 235 A.3d 482 , 499 (R.I. 2020) (brackets omitted) (quoting In re Emilee K., 153 A.3d 487, 494 (R.I. 2017)).

See In re Jessica C. , 690 A.2d 1357 , 1363, 1364 (R.I. 1997) (holding that child's hearsay statements made during counseling were admissible pursuant to Rule 803(4) because the statements were pertinent and helpful to therapist's assessment of the child's treatment needs); see also In re Emilee K. , 153 A.3d 487 , 494, 495 (R.I. 2017) (holding that child's disclosures of sexual abuse to evaluator during sexual-abuse assessments were admissible under Rule 803(4) ).