Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 California opinions name it 3 courts 2014–2025 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Gordongreen2 sentences2025Only when there is both blame shifting by the declarant and other circumstances suggest some improper motive for the blame shifting have courts found admission of a hearsay statement error.” (Smith, supra, 12 Cal.App.5th at p. 792 ; see People v. Gordon (1990) 50 Cal.3d 1223, 1252 (Gordon) [rejecting defendant’s argument that a statement against penal interest was “untrustworthy” and “exculpatory” because “the criminal liability that the statement risks is not the highest,” where the declarant’s liability was “significant nonetheless” and other circumstances indicated reliability], overruled o 2017(See Gordon , supra , 50 Cal.3d at pp. 1252-1253, 270 Cal.Rptr. 451 , 792 P.2d 251 ; Greenberger , supra , 58 Cal.App.4th at p. 337 , 68 Cal.Rptr.2d 61 ; Wilson , supra , 17 Cal.App.4th at pp. 276-277, 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 420 .) Only when there is both blame shifting by the declarant and other circumstances suggest some improper motive for the blame shifting have courts found admission of a hearsay statement error. | 1 | 5 |
People v. Duartegreen2 sentences2022And along those lines, defendant argues his case is analogous to People v. Duarte (2000) 24 Cal.4th 603, 614 (Duarte), where our Supreme Court held the admission of a codefendant’s hearsay statement was error as the statements were not specifically disserving. 2022(Id. at p. 613.) There, the victim was shot in her thigh with an assault rifle bullet, when a barrage of bullets hit her house. ( Duarte, supra, 24 Cal.4th at pp. 607-608.) Police later found guns and ammunition in the defendant’s apartment, though none matched those used in the shooting. | 1 | 5 |
People v. Edwardsgreen1 sentence2025Only when there is both blame shifting by the declarant and other circumstances suggest some improper motive for the blame shifting have courts found admission of a hearsay statement error.” (Smith, supra, 12 Cal.App.5th at p. 792 ; see People v. Gordon (1990) 50 Cal.3d 1223, 1252 (Gordon) [rejecting defendant’s argument that a statement against penal interest was “untrustworthy” and “exculpatory” because “the criminal liability that the statement risks is not the highest,” where the declarant’s liability was “significant nonetheless” and other circumstances indicated reliability], overruled o | 1 | 1 |
People v. Cortezgreen1 sentence2025(See Cortez, supra, 63 Cal.4th at p. 128 [affirming admission of statements where “the context in which [declarant] made the statements . . . does not suggest that [he] was trying to improve his situation with police”]; cf. People v. Gallardo (2017) 18 Cal.App.5th 51, 74-75 (Gallardo) [statements were not against penal interest where they were given in response to “leading questions or narrative statements by . . . informants” and declarant “complained that 11 law enforcement and a ‘snitch’ were trying to pin all of the blame for the offenses on him”].) c. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Gallardogreen1 sentence2025(See Cortez, supra, 63 Cal.4th at p. 128 [affirming admission of statements where “the context in which [declarant] made the statements . . . does not suggest that [he] was trying to improve his situation with police”]; cf. People v. Gallardo (2017) 18 Cal.App.5th 51, 74-75 (Gallardo) [statements were not against penal interest where they were given in response to “leading questions or narrative statements by . . . informants” and declarant “complained that 11 law enforcement and a ‘snitch’ were trying to pin all of the blame for the offenses on him”].) c. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Kraftgreen2 sentences2016(People v. Guerra (2006) 37 Cal.4th 1067, 1122 [ 40 Cal.Rptr.3d 118 , 129 P.3d 321 ]; People v. Kraft (2000) 23 Cal.4th 978, 1035 [ 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 , 5 P.3d 68 ].) The same principles logically apply to the admissibility of a hearsay statement under the exception for statements against penal interest. 2016(People v. Guerra (2006) 37 Cal.4th 1067, 1122 [ 40 Cal.Rptr.3d 118 , 129 P.3d 321 ]; People v. Kraft (2000) 23 Cal.4th 978, 1035 [ 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 , 5 P.3d 68 ].) The same principles logically apply to the admissibility of a hearsay statement under the exception for statements against penal interest. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Guerragreen2 sentences2016(People v. Guerra (2006) 37 Cal.4th 1067, 1122 [ 40 Cal.Rptr.3d 118 , 129 P.3d 321 ]; People v. Kraft (2000) 23 Cal.4th 978, 1035 [ 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 , 5 P.3d 68 ].) The same principles logically apply to the admissibility of a hearsay statement under the exception for statements against penal interest. 2016(People v. Guerra (2006) 37 Cal.4th 1067, 1122 [ 40 Cal.Rptr.3d 118 , 129 P.3d 321 ]; People v. Kraft (2000) 23 Cal.4th 978, 1035 [ 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 , 5 P.3d 68 ].) The same principles logically apply to the admissibility of a hearsay statement under the exception for statements against penal interest. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Wilson
green
2 sentences2017(See Gordon, supra, 50 Cal.3d at pp. 1252-1253; Greenberger, supra, 58 Cal.App.4th at p. 337 ; Wilson, supra, 17 Cal.App.4th at pp. 276- 277.) Only when there is both blame shifting by the declarant and other circumstances suggest some improper motive for the blame shifting have courts found admission of a hearsay statement error. 2017(See Gordon , supra , 50 Cal.3d at pp. 1252-1253, 270 Cal.Rptr. 451 , 792 P.2d 251 ; Greenberger , supra , 58 Cal.App.4th at p. 337 , 68 Cal.Rptr.2d 61 ; Wilson , supra , 17 Cal.App.4th at pp. 276-277, 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 420 .) Only when there is both blame shifting by the declarant and other circumstances suggest some improper motive for the blame shifting have courts found admission of a hearsay statement error. | 4 | 2016–2017 |
People v. Greenberger
green
2 sentences2017(See Gordon , supra , 50 Cal.3d at pp. 1252-1253, 270 Cal.Rptr. 451 , 792 P.2d 251 ; Greenberger , supra , 58 Cal.App.4th at p. 337 , 68 Cal.Rptr.2d 61 ; Wilson , supra , 17 Cal.App.4th at pp. 276-277, 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 420 .) Only when there is both blame shifting by the declarant and other circumstances suggest some improper motive for the blame shifting have courts found admission of a hearsay statement error. 2017(See Gordon , supra , 50 Cal.3d at pp. 1252-1253, 270 Cal.Rptr. 451 , 792 P.2d 251 ; Greenberger , supra , 58 Cal.App.4th at p. 337 , 68 Cal.Rptr.2d 61 ; Wilson , supra , 17 Cal.App.4th at pp. 276-277, 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 420 .) Only when there is both blame shifting by the declarant and other circumstances suggest some improper motive for the blame shifting have courts found admission of a hearsay statement error. | 4 | 2016–2017 |
People v. Smith
green
1 sentence2025Only when there is both blame shifting by the declarant and other circumstances suggest some improper motive for the blame shifting have courts found admission of a hearsay statement error.” (Smith, supra, 12 Cal.App.5th at p. 792 ; see People v. Gordon (1990) 50 Cal.3d 1223, 1252 (Gordon) [rejecting defendant’s argument that a statement against penal interest was “untrustworthy” and “exculpatory” because “the criminal liability that the statement risks is not the highest,” where the declarant’s liability was “significant nonetheless” and other circumstances indicated reliability], overruled o | 1 | 2025–2025 |
People v. Kerley
green
2 sentences2021Code, § 1390, subd. (a).) A party seeking to introduce a hearsay statement under this exception must establish that the elements have been met by a preponderance of the evidence at a foundational hearing. (§ 1390, subd. (b).) The hearsay evidence at issue is admissible at the foundational hearing, but it cannot be the sole basis for the court’s finding that the prerequisites of the statute have been met; there must be independent corroborative evidence. (§ 1390, subd. (b)(2); Kerley, supra, 23 Cal.App.5th at p. 550 .) In general, we review a trial court’s ruling on the admissibility of evidenc 2021Code, § 1390, subd. (a).) A party seeking to introduce a hearsay statement under this exception must establish that the elements have been met by a preponderance of the evidence at a foundational hearing. (§ 1390, subd. (b).) The hearsay evidence at issue is admissible at the foundational hearing, but it cannot be the sole basis for the court’s finding that the prerequisites of the statute have been met; there must be independent corroborative evidence. (§ 1390, subd. (b)(2); Kerley, supra, 23 Cal.App.5th at p. 550 .) In general, we review a trial court’s ruling on the admissibility of evidenc | 1 | 2021–2021 |
People v. Hill
green
1 sentence2014(People v. Hill, supra, 191 Cal.App.4th at p. 1131 .) Still, the Hill court observed that even if the hearsay used as a basis for an expert’s opinion had been admitted for the truth of the statement and subject to a confrontation clause challenge, most statements would not be considered testimonial because they were obtained in consensual conversations with gang members and not obtained with an eye to prosecuting any particular crime. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.