Hearsay

Listen to this article

WI Court of Supreme Court

Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Garland Dean Barnes

Case No.: 2018AP002005-CR

Officials: Rebecca Grassl Bradley, J.

Focus: Hearsay

This case raises two issues. The first concerns the right of a criminal defendant to be confronted with the witnesses against him under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The second concerns harmless error. Garland Dean Barnes was charged with delivering more than 50 grams of methamphetamine. As a discovery sanction, the circuit court prohibited Agent Duane Clauer from testifying at the trial. During the trial, the State asked another officer about Clauer’s observations during a “controlled buy,” i.e., a police setup to catch someone selling drugs. Barnes objected, arguing the testimony would be hearsay. The State responded that it was not seeking to introduce hearsay because it was not planning to use the testimony for the truth of the matter asserted. Instead, the State claimed the testimony would show why this other officer thought Barnes had sold meth (i.e., the other officer’s state of mind). The court overruled Barnes’s objection. The jury found him guilty. A judgment of conviction was entered, and Barnes sought postconviction relief, arguing his confrontation right had been violated. The circuit court denied relief. Barnes appealed, and the court of appeals affirmed the circuit court’s denial, reasoning the testimony was not offered for the truth of the matter asserted. State v. Barnes, No. 2018AP2005-CR, unpublished slip op., ¶¶33, 35 (Wis. Ct. App. Mar. 16, 2021) (per curiam). The court of appeals also indicated that if an error occurred, it was harmless. Id., ¶35 n.7.

The supreme court assumes without deciding that Barnes’s confrontation right was violated; however, it holds the error was harmless. Among other considerations, the evidence of Barnes’s guilt was overwhelming. Accordingly, “the guilty verdict actually rendered in this trial was surely unattributable to the error.” The supreme court affirms the decision of the court of appeals.

Affirmed

Decided 06/06/23

Full Text