United States v. Phillip Gomez

Good Law
472 F. App'x 601
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 28, 201210-10511California860 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Phillip Gomez (“Gomez”) appeals his jury trial convictions for assault and kidnapping. Gomez physically assaulted his then-girlfriend, Maria Marrietta (“Marrietta”), for a period of two to three hours, ending only when his mother arrived home and called 911. Gomez argues that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence the 911 transcript and recording and argues that there was insufficient evidence to convict him of kidnapping. We affirm.

1. The Confrontation Clause (U.S. Const, amend. VI.) forbids “admission of testimonial statements of a witness who did not appear at trial unless he was unavailable to testify, and the defendant had had a prior opportunity for cross-examination.” Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 53-54 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 , 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004). In Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 , 126 S.Ct. 2266 , 165 L.Ed.2d 224 (2006), the Supreme Court held that “[statements are nontestimonial when made in the course of police interrogation under circumstances objectively indicating that the primary purpose of the interrogation is to enable police assistance to meet an ongoing emergency.” Id. at 822 , 126 S.Ct. 2266 . In examining the “circumstances” of…

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.