California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Rivera, B245091 (Cal. App. 2014):
We apply the following standard on an appeal challenging a trial court's ruling that a witness was unavailable: "We review the trial court's resolution of disputed factual issues under the differential substantial evidence standard . . . , and independently review whether the facts demonstrate prosecutorial good faith and due diligence . . . ." (Herrera, supra, 49 Cal.4th at p. 623.) Finally, when it is determined on appeal that a witness's testimony was wrongly admitted in violation of constitutional confrontation protections, the error is subject to a harmless error analysis under the standard articulated in Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18, 24. (People v. Ledesma (2006) 39 Cal.4th 641, 709.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.