Is a defendant's right to confront under the confrontation clause not to be violated by the redacted confession of a codefendant?

However, "a defendant's rights under the confrontation clause are not violated by the admission in evidence of a codefendant's confession that has been redacted 'to eliminate not only the defendant's name, but any reference to his or her existence, ' even though the confession may incriminate the defendant when considered in conjunction with other evidence properly admitted against the defendant. [Citation.]" (People v. Fletcher (1996) 13 Cal.4th 451, 456, quoting Richardson v. Marsh (1987) 481 U.S. 200, 211 [107 S.Ct. 1702. 95 L.Ed.2d 176].) Veloz not only denied Venegas was in the car, he also denied seeing Venegas until after his arrest. The only references to Venegas appeared in the interrogating officer's questions.