NV: That third-party consenter consented is not inadmissible hearsay

Trial court’s ruling that the third party consenter’s consent was hearsay was plain error. It’s not offered for the truth of the matter asserted. Moultrie v. State, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 97, 2015 Nev. App. LEXIS 15 (Dec. 24, 2015).

Actually it is hearsay, but it’s an exception to the hearsay rule. That’s just a word game lawyers and judges play. It’s admissible because it shows why the search occurred. Still, it was admissible for that reason because the defense didn’t move to suppress.

This entry was posted in Burden of proof, Consent, Independent source, Protective sweep. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.