State v. Hudlow

¶1 Thomas Hudlow appeals from his conviction for delivery of a controlled substance. He assigns numerous errors, but we address only two of the claimed errors: the harmful admission of hearsay and the sufficiency of the evidence. We reverse the conviction and remand for a new trial because the trial court admitted testimonial hearsay in violation of the confrontation clause and evidence rules. We rule that the hearsay was prejudicial because, based on a jury instruction, the State needed to prove that Hudlow knew he was selling methamphetamine, not just a controlled substance. The evidence as…