Comer v. State

I dissent.

Two types of evidence were offered in this case involving the hearsay objection. The first concerns the police officers’ testimony relating conversations between McAl-lister and Comer. The second type of testimony related the officers’ own conversations with McAllister. The majority opinion concludes that the hearsay objection is inapplicable in both instances because the evidence was not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted therein. This analysis is correct with respect to the second type of evidence only. Based on McNew v. State (1979), Ind., 391 N.E.2d 607, the…