State v. Villanueva

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s convictions, holding that the trial court properly declined to give an investigative-inadequacy instruction, properly admitted the eyewitness identification, and did not violate the confrontation clause by permitting a substitute medical examiner to testify from autopsy photographs. The investigative-lapse theory concerning responding officers was unpreserved, while the remaining alleged lapses lacked evidentiary support; the identification procedure was not suggestive; and any error concerning other autopsy-related testimony was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.