Legal Opinion

Hosek v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 20, 1992No. F017868PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

VARTABEDIAN, J.

In Whitman v. Superior Court (1991) 54 Cal.3d 1063 [2 Cal.Rptr. 160, 820 P.2d 262], the Supreme Court held that at a preliminary examination conducted pursuant to Penal Code section 872 1 an investigating officer is permitted to testify to hearsay statements he has gathered in the course of his investigation. In the present case, petitioner contends we should exclude from this rule the hearsay statements of forensic experts, or at least we should hold that the hearsay in this case was unreliable. We reject both suggestions. Nothing in Proposition 115 provides a basis for…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Whitman v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  2. People v. AdamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  3. Thang Quy Tu v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Nienhouse v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
  2. Curry v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API