Roop v. State

In his brief on appeal, Devin Roop argues that the trial court erred in admitting Frank Yeater’s 911 call because it was “completely hearsay” that did not fall within the excited utterance- “or some other hearsay exception” and that the error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Roop’s argument is not eloquent; nor is it particularly thorough. But he makes it.

Moreover, in the trial court, he twice objected that the call was inadmissible hearsay intended to improperly bolster Yeater’s testimony. And once he made a proper objection, the burden shifted to the State, as the proponent of…