Is a witness entitled to cross-examine at trial under the hearsay rule?

California, United States of America

The following excerpt is from People v. Eslava, A135568 (Cal. App. 2014):

Before trial, Eslava moved to introduce the recording under the spontaneous-statement exception to the hearsay rule. (Evid. Code, 1240.) He argues that the trial court's exclusion of the recording denied him his constitutional rights to cross-examine witnesses, to present a defense, and to receive a fair trial. Whether a statement is spontaneous under section 1240, and thus " 'sufficiently trustworthy to be presented to the jury,' " is a question of fact for the trial court, and we review its ruling for an abuse of discretion. (People v. Poggi (1988) 45 Cal.3d 306, 318-319.)

Other Questions

Does a trial witness's deliberate forgetfulness result in the admission of a statement made by a witness that is inconsistent with the hearsay rule or confrontation clause? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant who does not have a written waiver allowing him to attend the criminal trial of a witness be present at the trial of the witness? (California, United States of America)
What are the principles of a motion for a new trial where a witness in a murder trial later dies before the trial has even begun? (California, United States of America)
When a witness at the preliminary hearing is unable to testify at trial, can the former witness be used at trial? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant entitled to a new trial if the trial court refuses to hear or rule on the motion? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant's claim that the trial court's failure to provide him with the means and subpoena witnesses to defend at trial a violation of his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself at trial reversible? (California, United States of America)
Does the "right ruling, wrong reasoning" rule apply to an evidentiary ruling that required the trial court to make findings of fact? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)
When a trial court makes disparaging or disparaging remarks to the defense counsel or witnesses, is it necessary for a new trial? (California, United States of America)
Does a deputy district attorney acquiesce in having the motion heard during the trial of a defendant before trial, rather than prior to trial? (California, United States of America)

Alexi white

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.