legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Ortiz
Appellant Juan Ortiz was convicted of insurance fraud and conspiracy to commit insurance fraud after the hotel he owned was burned in an obvious arson fire. We find that the prosecution failed to establish the prerequisites to the admissibility of an alleged coconspirators lengthy testimonial statement taken by two law enforcement officers without affording the defendant a contemporaneous opportunity to cross-examine the coconspirator. Undisputed evidence showed that the conspiracy had been thwarted by the time of the interrogation, and the coconspirators statements were not made in furtherance of a charged conspiracy to deceive law enforcement. Court conclude for that reason that the admission of a recorded police interrogation of one of the alleged but uncharged coconspirators violated appellants right to confrontation under the United States Constitution. As respondent has failed to show the error was harmless under the correct standard of review, we reverse the judgment. Court do not reach appellants remaining contentions.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale