People v. Gardeley
Supreme Court of California
927 P.2d 713 (Cal. 1996)
Rochelle Gardeley and Tommie Thompson (defendants), members of the Family Crips gang, were charged under California's STEP Act (which enhances penalties for crimes committed in association with a criminal street gang) alongside substantive charges arising from an assault on Edward Bruno; the prosecution's gang expert, Detective Patrick Boyd, testified based on a trial-consistent hypothetical that the assault was classic gang-related activity, and further testified about the gang's primary purpose and pattern of criminal activity relying on his interviews of the defendants and a third assailant, conversations with other Family Crips members, and discussions with law enforcement about three other incidents involving the gang — sources Gardeley and Thompson objected to as inadmissible hearsay. The trial court admitted the testimony and convicted both defendants of the STEP Act violation, but an intermediate appellate court reversed that conviction, finding Boyd's reliance on facts he lacked firsthand knowledge of improper, and the prosecution appealed.
Whether an expert witness testifying about criminal gang activity may rely on otherwise inadmissible hearsay information, such as gang-member interviews and conversations with fellow officers about prior incidents, in forming an expert opinion that a defendant's crime was gang-related.