United States v. Peneaux

In September 2004, a federal jury convicted Sherman Peneaux (defendant) of four counts of sexual abuse and two counts of assault of his children, TP and NP. Adult witnesses testified that beginning around March 2002, three-year-old TP told at least six adults that Peneaux had sexually and physically abused her, and two-year-old NP told at least two of those adults that Peneaux had physically abused NP. One witness, pediatrician Dr. Lori Strong, testified that during medical examinations, TP disclosed that Peneaux molested her, and TP and NP both disclosed that Peneaux burned them with cigarettes. Strong also testified that Strong told TP, among other things, that Strong needed to treat any types of germs that might be on TP’s private parts, and that it was important for TP to be honest in answering Strong’s questions because germs could make TP sick. According to Strong, TP seemed to understand Strong’s explanation of the visit’s purpose and the importance of being honest to Strong during the visit. NP did not testify. TP’s trial testimony was inconsistent: TP initially denied that Peneaux had abused her but later testified to specific examples of molestation and physical abuse. Peneaux appealed, contesting in relevant part that the district court had erred by admitting TP’s and NP’s hearsay statements through Dr. Strong’s testimony, because (1) TP’s statements did not fit within Federal Rule of Evidence 803(4), the medical-treatment exception to the general rule against admitting hearsay, and (2) NP’s statements violated Peneaux’s right to confront witnesses because NP did not testify at trial.