Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

2009AP1245-CR State v. Whyte

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//October 26, 2010//

2009AP1245-CR State v. Whyte

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//October 26, 2010//

Listen to this article

Evidence
Confrontation Clause; harmless error

Peter Whyte appeals a judgment, entered upon a jury’s verdict, convicting him of second-degree intentional homicide. Whyte argues that the admission of hearsay evidence violated his right to confrontation. We conclude the error, if any, in admitting the challenged testimony was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of Whyte’s guilt. We therefore affirm the judgment. This opinion will not be published.

2009AP1245-CR State v. Whyte

Dist III, St. Croix County, Lundell, J., Per Curiam

Attorneys: For Appellant: Fairchild, Michael J., Menomonie; For Respondent: Johnson, Eric G., Hudson; Moeller, Marguerite M., Madison

Full Text

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests