Corella

People v. Corella

Good Law
122 Cal. App. 4th 461·18 Cal. Rptr. 3d 770·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 1552·2004 Daily Journal DAR 11645·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8533
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 16, 2004B163370California4,048 words

Opinion

Opinion

Perren, J.

Miguel Angel Corella, Jr., appeals his conviction for corporal injury to a spouse. (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a).) Immediately after the incident, Corella’s wife told a 911 operator that her husband had hit her. She repeated the accusation to the police officer and medical personnel who responded to the 911 call. At the preliminary hearing, Mrs. Corella told a different story exculpating her husband and testifying that her statement to the police was false. When cautioned concerning self-incrimination, Mrs. Corella refused to complete her testimony, and her prior preliminary hearing testimony was stricken. Mrs. Corella did not testify at trial.

At trial, the court admitted Mrs. Corella’s inculpatory statements to the police as spontaneous statements (Evid. Code, § 1240), but excluded her exculpatory preliminary hearing “testimony” because it had been stricken. Corella claims the trial court erred in both rulings. He contends that the admission of his wife’s statements to the police violated his constitutional right of confrontation because they did not qualify as section 1240 spontaneous statements, and were “testimonial” statements under the recent case of Crawford v.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.