Opinion ID: 1190835
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Evidence of the Criminal Investigation

Text: In addition to claiming that the court erred in admitting the criminal investigator's testimony, Pacheco also claims the court erred in admitting evidence of the criminal investigation. In particular, Pacheco claims the court erred when it admitted testimony pertaining to items of evidence which had been removed from Pacheco's office prior to the fire and were found in his basement in the course of a search pursuant to a warrant. Regarding the search warrant, it was Pacheco who originally introduced evidence of the search warrant and when Safeco later presented evidence of the search warrant Pacheco did not object. Pacheco did not request that the term search warrant and Pacheco's counsel's reference to the search warrant throughout the trial be stricken from the record. Hence, any possible error was invited and not preserved by objection.