P. v. Arnold CA4/1
Defendant David John Arnold appeals from a judgment of conviction entered after a jury found him guilty of two counts of resisting an executive officer. On appeal, Arnold contends that the trial court erred in admitting a recording of a jail telephone call that Arnold had with another individual in which Arnold admitted that he "did all of it." According to Arnold, he had other criminal cases pending against him at the time, and his statement could have referred to the other cases, and not to the present case. Arnold contends that the admission in evidence of the statement may have improperly misled or confused the jury, and ultimately violated his rights to due process, confrontation, and a fair trial. Arnold argues in the alternative that the court should have also admitted the contents of other jail calls in which Arnold denied guilt, under the rule of completeness.
Comments on P. v. Arnold CA4/1