State v. Edwards

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s convictions, concluding that his hearsay challenge was unpreserved because counsel objected to the challenged testimony as cumulative rather than on hearsay grounds. It further held that any confrontation violation from admitting a non testifying witness’s identification was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt in light of the cumulative nature of the evidence and the overwhelming independent proof of guilt. The court also held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by giving a general third-party culpability instruction without naming the proposed culprits.