State v. Edwards

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant's convictions, holding that his hearsay challenge was unpreserved because counsel objected to the challenged testimony as cumulative rather than hearsay. The court assumed without deciding that admitting a nontestifying witness's identification violated the Confrontation Clause but held the error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the identification was cumulative of overwhelming independent evidence. It also held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by giving a general third-party culpability instruction without naming the proposed culprits.