legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Atwood CA1/3
Defendant Melissa Atwood appeals from a judgment of conviction after a jury found her guilty of elder abuse, identity theft, commercial burglary and grand theft. The charges arose from defendant obtaining a credit union loan by representing herself to be her mother, Suzi Atwood. On appeal, defendant contends the trial court erred by admitting hearsay statements of Suzi Atwood, who did not testify, and by not giving requested instructions limiting the statements to a nonhearsay purpose. Defendant argues that the admission of the hearsay evidence also violated her rights under the confrontation clause.
Because the challenged statements were not testimonial, we do not find a violation of defendant’s confrontation clause rights. Suzi Atwood’s out-of-court statements were admissible for the nonhearsay purpose of imparting information to the credit union and explaining its subsequent action. While we agree with defendant that the trial court erred in admitting these statements for

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale