Summary
The New Mexico Supreme Court held that the trial court improperly admitted hearsay statements from recorded jail telephone calls involving statements attributed to Jessica Gutierrez about Robert Macias's alleged role in a shooting. The court rejected the State's arguments that the statements were admissible for impeachment, to refresh recollection, or under hearsay exceptions including present sense impression and excited utterance. Because the error was not harmless, the court vacated Macias's convictions and remanded for a new trial.
Holdings
- The statements were out-of-court statements offered to prove the truth of the matters asserted and therefore constituted hearsay under Rule 11-801(C) NMRA.
- The State did not properly impeach Eric or Jessica with the recorded statements, and the recording and transcript could not be admitted for the jury's use as substantive evidence merely by characterizing their use as impeachment.
- The State did not comply with the permissible procedure for refreshing recollection, and the recording and transcript were not admissible as substantive exhibits for the jury under the guise of refreshing recollection.
- The statements did not qualify as present-sense impressions, excited utterances, records of regularly conducted activity, or recorded recollections.
- The erroneous admission of the hearsay statements was not harmless because there was a reasonable probability that the statements affected the jury's verdict.
Questions Presented
- Whether the recorded telephone conversation and transcript containing Jessica Gutierrez's out-of-court statements were inadmissible hearsay.
- Whether the statements could properly be admitted for impeachment or to refresh the witnesses' recollections.
- Whether the statements qualified under the present-sense-impression, excited-utterance, business-records, or recorded-recollection exceptions to the hearsay rule.
- Whether the erroneous admission of the statements was harmless.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (17)
- State v. McClaugherty, 2003-NMSC-006, ¶¶ 17, 27, 133 N.M. 459, 64 P.3d 486(followed)
- State v. Lente, 2005-NMCA-111, ¶ 3, 138 N.M. 312, 119 P.3d 737(followed)
- State v. Boyett, 2008-NMSC-030, ¶ 25, 144 N.M. 184, 185 P.3d 355(followed)
- State v. Hermosillo, 88 N.M. 424, 432, 540 P.2d 1313, 1321 (Ct. App. 1975)(followed)
- State v. Dominguez, 2007-NMSC-060, ¶ 18, 142 N.M. 811, 171 P.3d 750(followed)
- State v. Spadafore, 159 W. Va. 236, 220 S.E.2d 655, 656 (1975)(followed)
- State v. Bazan, 90 N.M. 209, 212, 561 P.2d 482, 485 (Ct. App. 1977)(followed)
- State v. Orona, 92 N.M. 450, 454-455, 589 P.2d 1041, 1045-1046 (1979)(followed)
- State v. Martinez, 99 N.M. 48, 51, 653 P.2d 879, 882 (Ct. App. 1982)(followed)
- State v. Martinez, 102 N.M. 94, 99, 691 P.2d 887, 892 (Ct. App. 1984)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 17.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…