What is the standard of review for determining whether a statement is case-specific, testimonial hearsay?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Lund, 279 Cal.Rptr.3d 697, 64 Cal.App.5th 1119 (Cal. App. 2021):
Sanchez did not address the standard of review for determining whether a statement is case-specific, testimonial hearsay. As the first step of the analysis is a "traditional hearsay inquiry" into whether a statement was made out of court and is offered for its truth, we apply the abuse of discretion standard at this step. ( Sanchez , supra , 63 Cal.4th at p. 680, 204 Cal.Rptr.3d 102, 374 P.3d 320.) "A trial court's decision to admit or exclude evidence is reviewed for abuse of discretion, and it will not be disturbed unless there is a showing that the trial court acted in an arbitrary, capricious, or absurd manner resulting in a miscarriage of justice." ( People v. Wall (2017) 3 Cal.5th 1048, 1069, 224 Cal.Rptr.3d 861, 404 P.3d 1209.) By contrast, Sanchez s second step, concerning whether a statement is testimonial, implicates the constitutional right of confrontation,
[64 Cal.App.5th 1133]
so we independently review that issue. ( People v. Nelson (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 1453, 1466, 119 Cal.Rptr.3d 56.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
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.
