Opinion ID: 2507905
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Admission of Victim's Statement to a Coworker.

Text: Defendant claims that his rights to confrontation, due process of law, and a fair determination of guilt and penalty under the California Evidence Code and the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution were violated when the trial court admitted a purported hearsay statement of the victim offered to show her alleged fear of defendant. This claim has no merit. At trial, Susan Hunsacker took the stand and testified that she saw Mary at work the day before her death. She stated that Mary seemed very nervous and fearful of defendant. On cross-examination, defense counsel asked Hunsacker how Mary had manifested her alleged nervousness, whether Mary had said she and defendant had been arguing and what about, and whether Mary had told her that defendant refused to work. On redirect, the prosecutor asked for more details about the conversation between Hunsacker and Mary. Hunsacker testified that Mary complained that she had saved $300 to fix her car, but that defendant wanted to use the money for himself. The prosecution then asked what Mary's response to this was, and Hunsacker continued, On the Saturday before her death, she looked at me and she said, `I finally told him no. I wonder what he's going to do to me.' During closing argument, the prosecutor urged the jury to consider Hunsacker's testimony, suggesting that intent, malice, and premeditation could all be inferred from the statement, I wonder what he's going to do to me. Defendant's claim is without merit. Even assuming the statement was admitted in error, such error was harmless under any standard in light of the fact that testimony as to Mary's state of mind was not particularly inculpatory and that evidence of defendant's guilt was overwhelming.