This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Officer Gutierrez testified that a cell phone was found in D's front pocket with 'pay-owes' in it. D raised a lack of foundation objection. The trial court sustained the objection. P elicited testimony from Officer Gutierrez regarding his training and experience in looking for evidence on cell phones. The Officer testified he found individual names and next to each would be a dollar amount like $20, $30 with a dollar sign. The Officer testified that the phone was currently in the evidence warehouse. D objected on hearsay grounds but the court overruled the objections. On cross-examination, D clarified that although the cell phone had not been brought to trial or entered into evidence, it could be requested and accessed from evidence storage. On appeal, D claims the contents of the cell phone should have been excluded as hearsay, and as a violation of the secondary evidence rule.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.