People v. Kamp CA4/2

FACTS

At the hearing, a clinical supervisor for Conrep testified that on January 23, 2013,

she spoke to defendant and concluded that he was disoriented,1 and she believed that

there was something medically wrong with him. Not admitted for its truth, but to explain

what the supervisor did, she testified that a Conrep registered nurse took defendant’s

blood pressure, which was quite elevated, and the nurse recommended that defendant be

seen by a doctor.2 As a consequence, defendant was transported to Riverside Community

Hospital, to which defendant agreed.3 The supervisor ultimately opined that defendant

1 Defendant ignores this testimony, and focuses on the supervisor’s testimony that her meeting with defendant was prompted by a statement by defendant’s attending physician that defendant seemed disoriented, which, although not objected to below, defendant now asserts was hearsay (“of course”, states appellate counsel). It was not, as we are certain it was admitted not for its truth, but to explain what the supervisor did, which was to talk to defendant. Additionally, as much as defendant seems to want the supervisor’s testimony that she concluded, on her own, after speaking…