State v. Gurule

Summary

The New Mexico Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals, holding that the search warrant provided probable cause to seize the defendants' digital camera, that the exclusion of a witness’s testimony under the fruit‑of‑the‑poisonous‑tree doctrine was erroneous, and that the statement made by a mother to her son was non‑testimonial and therefore not barred by the Confrontation Clause. The case was remanded for a hearing on the admissibility of that statement under the rules of evidence.