Court Opinion

ID: 9578192
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:42:39.900248+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:25:11.715362
License: Public Domain

BRETT, Presiding Judge,
specially concurring:
I agree that the appellant’s conviction must be affirmed. However, I can not agree with the opinion’s treatment of the admission of the inventory report which resulted from the search of the automobile. Contrary to the statement in the majority opinion, the inventory report was offered to show that the drugs were, in fact, discovered within the car. Therefore, the inventory report was hearsay and, as such, inadmissible pursuant to 12 O.S.1981, § 2803(8)a. However, defense counsel failed to object to the admission of the report as being hearsay, and further, I find its admission was harmless error because it was merely cumulative. The policeman who took the inventory testified, therefore the appellant was not denied the right to confrontation of witnesses and the actual drugs found in the car were also introduced into evidence.