Legal Opinion
People v. Yates
California Court of Appeal, 5th District
Decided July 23, 2018No. B279863PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLui, P.J.
*476This case presents the following issue: May an expert relate as true the case-specific content of documents which were neither admitted into evidence nor shown to be covered by a hearsay exception? We conclude under People v. Sanchez (2016) 63 Cal.4th 665, 684-686, 204 Cal.Rptr.3d 102, 374 P.3d 320 ( Sanchez ), that such testimony is inadmissible.
A jury found David Yates (Yates) to be a sexually violent predator (SVP) under the Sexually Violent Predators Act (the SVP Act or the Act). ( Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6600 et seq. )1 Yates contends the jury's finding must be overturned because the trial…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- People v. LedesmaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
- People v. WaidlaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
- People v. ZamudioCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Mackey v. Bd. of Trs. of the Cal. State Univ., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Bennett v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2019
- In re MorseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021
- People v. Clark CA2/3California Court of Appeal · 2020
- People v. Ding CA3California Court of Appeal · 2021
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.