State v. Hardy

946 P.2d 1175 (1997)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Wilkins testified that as she stood on a downtown Seattle street corner at 4:30 in the morning, D approached her, spoke with her for a few minutes, and then robbed her of her jewelry. Wilkins testified D remained for a few minutes trying to strike up a friendly relationship but she refused. Officer Stewart testified he was summoned to the scene and arrived within a minute of the call. Officer Stewart testified the alleged victim and her female companion Margaret Smith were 'very, very, distraught and upset . . . breaking down into tears' and 'excited' as they told him what allegedly happened. Over D's objection, the trial court admitted the officer's testimony under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule. ER 803(a)(2). While alleged victim Wilkins testified at trial, her friend Margaret Smith did not. D was found a few minutes after the alleged robbery at a nearby intersection passed out in his black Camaro. Wilkins' jewelry was found in D's pockets. D took the stand and claimed Wilkins was in a push-and-shove match with her female friend and he had simply helped out by picking up loose jewelry from the ground. He did not deny he left the scene with the jewelry in his pocket, but such would not constitute robbery. Prior to trial, P had moved to introduce D's prior felony drug conviction for impeachment purposes should he choose to testify. D objected claiming the prior drug conviction was not only irrelevant but very prejudicial as well. The court stated that the impeachment value was almost nil but admitted the prior conviction as an unnamed felony, reasoning 'the jury should be entitled to know that there is some prior conviction.' The conviction was admitted and D was convicted and the Court of Appeals affirmed. D appealed.