Court Opinion

ID: 9652039
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 17:12:08.543262+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:12:46.635212
License: Public Domain

CARAWAY, J.,
concurring.
11While I concur in the ruling, I write to make clear that the defense objections to the hearsay statements of Ruth Clark’s were improperly overruled. “Generally, an explanation of the officer’s actions should never be an acceptable basis upon which to admit an out-of-court declaration when the so-called ‘explanation’ involves a direct assertion of criminal activity against the accused.” State v. Hearold, 603 So.2d 731, 737 (La.1992). However, from the direct testimony of Ruth Clark and the overwhelming circumstantial evidence, it was more than sufficiently established that a knife was used in the battery so that the admission of the hearsay evidence was harmless error.