Sisavath

In this case we apply the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Crawford v. Washington (2004) 541 U.S. 36 [ 158 L.Ed.2d 177 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 ] to a child victim’s hearsay statements admitted in a sexual abuse prosecution under Evidence Code section 1360. In Crawford , the court announced the new rule that the admission of “testimonial” hearsay statements against a criminal defendant violates the confrontation clause of the Sixth Amendment if the declarant is unavailable to testify at trial and the defendant had no previous opportunity to cross-examine. In the published part of this opinion, we hold that the hearsay statements challenged here were inadmissible under the Crawford rule. The error necessitates the reversal of four of defendant Seum Sisavath’s abuse convictions. Five other abuse convictions and two convictions for drug possession are unaffected.

In the unpublished part of this opinion, we consider defendant’s four other grounds for appeal: 1) improper admission of expert testimony; 2) penalizing defendant for exercising his right to remain silent; 3) improper amendment of the information; and 4) cumulative error. We reject each of these.

The judgment is…