How have courts interpreted hearsay testimony in a preliminary hearing?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Romeo, A140146 (Cal. App. 2015):

12. Cf. Whitman v. Superior Court (1991) 54 Cal.3d 1063, 1074 [construing section 872, subdivision (b), which permits admission of hearsay testimony by an investigating officer for purposes of establishing probable cause in a preliminary hearing, to permit only "officers with lengthy experience or special training to testify" in order to ensure the "testifying officer will be capable of using his or her experience and expertise to assess the circumstances under which the statement is made and to accurately describe those circumstances to the magistrate so as to increase the reliability of the underlying evidence"].

Other Questions


How have courts interpreted section 1016.5 of the California Immigration Code and how have the courts interpreted the word 'court' in that section? (California, United States of America)
Does the absence of a witness from the jurisdiction of a preliminary hearing preclude a defendant from giving evidence at trial of his preliminary hearing testimony? (California, United States of America)
Whether a court's ruling is based on oral testimony or written declarations, when conflicting inferences can reasonably be drawn from the facts, can the appellate court defer to the trial court's factual determinations? (California, United States of America)
On a motion to be heard by the Court of Appeal at the Superior Court of California for a change of venue, does the Court have any jurisdiction or authority to hear the motion? (California, United States of America)
Can a witness at a preliminary hearing be prevented from hearing or discussing the testimony of another witness? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted a stipulation that a plaintiff must pay any fees that the court might order after hearing an appeal? (California, United States of America)
If a defendant's request for reappointment of counsel for a preliminary hearing was rejected immediately before the preliminary hearing commenced, is such error harmless even under the beyond-the-reasonable doubt standard? (California, United States of America)
Does the Court of Appeal have found that Defendant Joiner did not waive his assumed constitutional right to be personally present at the remand hearing and that the court erred in conducting that hearing in his absence? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted "careful scrutiny" in a preliminary hearing where a defendant is denied the right to cross-examine witnesses? (California, United States of America)
Can a preliminary hearing be held on the basis that the prosecution attorney did not raise any relevant issues at the preliminary hearing? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.