Did the District Court abuse its discretion when it determined K.M.s hearsay statements were admissible?
2. Should the District Court have excluded K.M.’s hearsay statements as a violation of the right of confrontation, guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On July 11, 2001, the State of Montana filed an Information charging S.T.M. with one felony count of incest, in violation of § 45-5-507, MCA. Alternatively, S.T.M. was charged with sexual assault, a felony, and surreptitious visual observation, a misdemeanor, in violation of §§ 45-5-502 and -223, MCA, respectively. The charges stem from allegations that S.T.M. licked the vagina of K.M., his 35-month-old daughter, while he was putting her to bed one evening. K.M. was the State’s primary witness. S.T.M. challenged her competency to testify, and the State conceded that she was not competent to testify due to her age. However, the State sought to have K.M.’s hearsay statements–made to her mother and to a social worker-admitted into evidence under Rule 804(b)(5), M.R.Evid., which provides a residual exception
