People v. Arauz
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
YEGAN, J.
Where, as here, an accomplice inculpates himself and his codefendant to a fellow inmate/informant, his statements, if trustworthy, are admissible in the codefendant’s trial. Such statements are declarations against penal interest, are not “testimonial,” and their admission does not violate the confrontation clause as explained in Crawford v. Washington (2004) 541 U.S. 36 [158 L.Ed.2d 177, 124 S.Ct. 1354] (Crawford).
Brandon Ray Arauz and Ulises Kline appeal their convictions by jury for criminal street gang activity (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. (a))1 and two counts of attempted…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Davis v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Michigan v. BryantSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- People v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- People v. Gallardo, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- People v. Washington, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- People v. SalvadorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- State v. PatelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2022
- P. v. Meraz CA2/4California Court of Appeal · 2013
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.