State v. Robles

Summary

The court upheld the defendant’s manslaughter and criminal firearm-possession convictions. It concluded that testimony based on independently reviewed autopsy photographs did not violate confrontation rights, and any error concerning testimony derived from the autopsy report was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The court reversed the conviction for possessing a weapon in a motor vehicle because the state failed to present admissible evidence establishing that the defendant lacked a proper permit. Justice Mullins and Justice D’Auria, each concurring in part and dissenting in part, would have upheld the motor-vehicle weapons conviction on the ground that the stipulation and applicable permit statutes supported the trial court’s finding.