Hosek

In Whitman v. Superior Court (1991) 54 Cal.3d 1063 [ 2 Cal.Rptr. 160 , 820 P.2d 262 ], the Supreme Court held that at a preliminary examination conducted pursuant to Penal Code section 872 an investigating officer is permitted to testify to hearsay statements he has gathered in the course of his investigation. In the present case, petitioner contends we should exclude from this rule the hearsay statements of forensic experts, or at least we should hold that the hearsay in this case was unreliable. We reject both suggestions. Nothing in Proposition 115 provides a basis for treating forensic experts differently than other potential witnesses an officer may interview during an investigation. (See § 872, as amended; Cal. Const., art. I, § 30, subd. (b).) We find the testimony in the present case was properly admitted.

Facts

This matter is before us on a petition for writ of prohibition, by which petitioner seeks to require the superior court to grant her motion pursuant to section 995. The following statement of facts is based upon evidence presented at the preliminary examination.

Highway Patrol Officer Norman Johnson saw petitioner driving about 8:30 p.m. on December 1,…