People v. Bingham (Cal. Ct. App. - Sept. 26, 2023)

The key piece of evidence in a domestic violence prosecution is a 911 call from the victim in which she says she was beat up by her boyfriend. As in many domestic violence cases, here, the victim is the only eyewitness besides the alleged perpetrator to the actual crime, and is the only one who can testify as to how she received her injuries.

Despite the fact the key piece of evidence is an (admissible) hearsay statement from the victim's 911 call, the trial court erroneously refuses to allow multiple (admissible) hearsay statements from the victim that contradict her statements in the 911 call and in which she repeatedly tells the police -- as well swears under oath -- that the defendant did not assault her, and was not guilty of the offense.

The Court of Appeal holds that this evidence was wrongfully excluded but that this was . . . harmless error.

Given that the key evidence of the defendant's guilt here is the victim's statement that he was guilty, it's got to be incredibly rare that it's allegedly harmless error to exclude the victim's contrary statements that he's actually innocent.

Harmless error rulings like that on appeal sort of make the actual trial kinda irrelevant, no?