Can a defendant argue there can be no constitutionally effective cross-examination when the witness cannot recall the facts related in his own hearsay statement?

To the extent defendant argues there can be no constitutionally effective cross-examination when the witness cannot recall the facts related in his own hearsay statement, that contention also lacks merit. (See People v. Cowan (2010) 50 Cal.4th 401, 468 [" 'when a hearsay declarant is present at trial and subject to unrestricted cross-examination,' 'the traditional protections of the oath, cross-examination, and opportunity for the jury to observe the witness'[s] demeanor satisfy the constitutional requirements' notwithstanding the witness's claimed memory loss about the facts related in the hearsay statement" (alteration in Cowan)].)