Opinion ID: 6499827
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Officer Igros

Text: [59] Caso asserts that Officer Igros provided hearsay testimony that Caso was Brewer’s source of the methamphetamine. Officer Igros testified that he “asked [Brewer] where she got the dope that was found on her. She stated she got it from Mr. Caso.” Tr. at 60 (Jury Trial, Feb. 26, 2019). [60] This statement by Officer Igros is non-hearsay, as it was providing background information on why Caso was targeted for the controlled buy rather than being introduced for its truth. Officer Igros testified that Brewer was summoned to the Mandaña Task Force office after she was found with “dope” earlier in the day. Id. at 59. When asked by the prosecutor what happened after Brewer arrived at the office, Officer Igros testified that Brewer was debriefed, and she revealed Caso as her source. The prosecutor then asked Officer Igros questions about the “setting up of the controlled buy.” Id. It is apparent from the record that Officer Igros’s statement was not intended to prove that Caso was the source of the methamphetamine sold to Brewer during the controlled buy, but that Caso was the source of the methamphetamine found on Brewer in the incident earlier in the day which led to her cooperation in the controlled buy. Like in Mateo, Officer Igros testified to Brewer’s statement to provide context for initiating the controlled buy. [61] The trial court did not commit error in admitting Officer Igros’s statement. The statement was non-hearsay, introduced for the effect it had on the listener. People v. Caso, 2022 Guam 6, Opinion Page 26 of 27