Opinion ID: 1844186
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: admission of statements of an unidentified person

Text: In Parker's next issue on appeal, he asserts that the trial court erred by allowing the State to rehabilitate a witness with inadmissible statements of an unidentified person. Specifically, Parker argues that the State should not have been permitted to ask Deputy Timothy Bargo about a statement made by an unidentified person during his deposition. Parker contends that the statement was hearsay and violated his Sixth Amendment right of confrontation. We conclude that this argument is meritless. A review of the record indicates that Bargo never recounted the statement made by the unidentified person. The only time the actual statement was mentioned before the jury was when the State asked Bargo: Now if one of the defense attorneys had in some way stated Mr. Parker was the one that was helping Mr. Bush with the battery, would that have you would have heard that and that would be in this record. When questioning resumed after Parker's objection, the State only asked Bargo to look at the statement and then asked if he recalled that statement being made at his deposition. Bargo responded no and the State asked if he made the statement. Bargo again responded no because he was never able to identify any of the passengers other than by the false names given to him on the morning he stopped Bush's car. Because the actual statement made by the unidentified person was never introduced into evidence, it is not subject to a hearsay or confrontation challenge, and we conclude that the trial court did not err in overruling Parker's objection.