DA Steve Wolfson defends move to allow hearsay in more testimony
CARSON CITY — A bill that would allow introduction of hearsay evidence in some preliminary court proceedings would not preclude judges from weighing the evidence and dismissing cases where appropriate, supporters of the measure said Wednesday.
Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson testified in support of Assembly Bill 193, which has been narrowed with an Assembly amendment limiting the use of hearsay in preliminary hearings and grand jury proceedings to a specific set of crimes, primarily those involving children 16 and younger.
The current version of the bill would allow hearsay only in cases that involved sexual assault of children younger than 16, abuse of children younger than 16 or felony domestic violence that resulted in substantial bodily harm.
Public defenders testified in opposition to the amended bill, which has been proposed in part to avoid the trauma of having children testify or be cross-examined at preliminary hearings. They would still have to testify at trial.
Wolfson told the Senate Judiciary Committee, which heard testimony on the controversial bill, that even if hearsay statements are allowed, it doesn’t mean that such evidence will be used routinely by prosecutors.
“It is not a blanket ticket to introduce hearsay from children in every case,” he said.
There are times when a prosecutor might want a child to testify to see how he or she would hold up under cross-examination, Wolfson said.
But Clark County Public Defender Phil Kohn said the bill as written would allow hearsay upon hearsay at a preliminary hearing.
A statement taken by a police officer could, under the proposal, be read into the record by someone else, he said.
Kohn suggested returning the issue to the state’s Advisory Commission on the Administration of Justice to see if legislation could be drafted that would ensure fairness.
The Judiciary Committee took no immediate action on the measure, which has generated intense debate in the Legislature.
The bill prompted more than 200 defense attorneys to threaten political retaliation against elected officials who support the bill.
“We call upon all elected officials to declare either their support or opposition to this bill,” stated the letter with the names of 226 defense lawyers attached. “Neutrality is not an option.”
Judiciary Chairman Greg Brower, R-Reno, said after the hearing, he will assess if amendments are needed but plans to process the legislation quickly.
He also called the attorney’s letter “outrageous” and an unprecedented break in protocol, etiquette and propriety.
Brower said the threat to withhold support for elected officials is arguably illegal and undermined their credibility with the committee.
Even so, he called it “background noise” that would not affect how he would process the bill.
Hearsay is currently prohibited by Nevada law for grand jury proceedings and disallowed in preliminary hearings based on case law.
Victim advocates support the bill because it means witnesses and victims could spend less time in court recounting crimes against them. In some domestic violence cases, victims sometimes still live with or have feelings for their attacker.
Hearsay evidence is allowed in 36 other states.
Contact Sean Whaley at swhaley@reviewjournal.com or 775-687-3900. Find him on Twitter: @seanw801
