California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Babalola v. Superior Court, 11 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2025, 121 Cal.Rptr.3d 740, 192 Cal.App.4th 948, 2011 Daily Journal D.A.R. 24 (Cal. App. 2011):
Second, testimony from the defendant's preliminary hearing concerning the circumstances surrounding the charged offenses, whether or not sufficient for issuance of a criminal protective order by itself, will inevitably be relevant to the determination of good cause under section 136.2, subdivision (a). That testimony may include hearsay not otherwise admissible at trial. (See 872, subd. (b); **754 Whitman v. Superior Court (1991) 54 Cal.3d 1063, 1072, 2 Cal.Rptr.2d 160, 820 P.2d 262.) We leave to another day the question whether such hearsay testimony may be considered by the court in deciding the question of good cause for issuance of a criminal protective order. (But see 136.2, subd. (h) [authorizing court in cases involving charges of domestic violence to consider information from enumerated electronic databases regarding defendant's history].) However, if evidence from the preliminary hearing is to be presented to the court considering issuance of a criminal protective order, the transcript of the hearing itself, not a summary of the testimony by counsel who was not present, should be provided to the court. (Cf. Whitman, at pp. 1072-1073, 2 Cal.Rptr.2d 160, 820 P.2d 262 [officer at preliminary hearing may not simply read police report prepared by absent investigating officer].)
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.