P. v. Thompson
Appellant claims: "The admission of [the threat] evidence, without any limiting instruction, violated . . . appellant's federal constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial." Appellant "waived his constitutional claims by failing to articulate them below. [Citations.] Those constitutional claims, which depend on a finding that the threat evidence was hearsay, are also meritless. This evidence was not offered for its truth." (People v. Burgener, supra, 29 Cal.4th at p. 869.) Furthermore, as we discuss below, trial counsel may have had a sound tactical reason for not requesting a limiting instruction.
Comments on P. v. Thompson