Ramirez

A testifying “gang expert” bases his opinion on hearsay. Here we hold the hearsay is not “testimonial” under Crawford v. Washington (2004) 541 U.S. 36 [ 158 L.Ed.2d 177 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 ], and it is permissible for the jury to consider the truth of the hearsay in evaluating the expert’s opinion.

A jury convicted Jose Manuel Ramirez of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211), assault with a firearm (§ 245, subd. (a)(2)), and three counts of attempted willful, deliberate and premeditated murder (§§ 664, 187, subd. (a)). The jury also found Ramirez committed each offense for the benefit of, at the direction of, and in association with a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)).

On appeal, Ramirez contends the trial court erred in allowing a gang expert to give hearsay testimony about the facts of predicate crimes that form an element of the gang enhancement. We affirm.

FACTS

On December 13, 2004, Kea Kou and Phaly Lim were leaving a store in Long Beach when a Hispanic male, about 19 or 20 years old, approached Kou. The Hispanic male tried to hit Kou and grabbed his backpack. Lim came to Kou’s aid. Kou and Lim had the upper hand in the struggle until Ramirez appeared with a…