## Facts

- A residential burglary and grand theft were reported after a victim returned to a locked apartment and found jewelry worth about $3,000 missing.
- An officer (Yahn) took the initial report after speaking directly with the victim and the apartment manager (Schiro).
- A detective (Osman), a 12-year officer, later conducted follow-up work, including speaking with the victim and reviewing and discussing Yahn’s report with Yahn.
- Osman did not interview Schiro; his knowledge of Schiro’s account came only from Yahn’s report and Yahn’s statements.
- At the preliminary hearing, Osman testified to the victim’s report establishing the burglary and theft.
- To connect Wimberly to the crimes, Osman testified that Yahn reported Schiro said Schiro let Wimberly into the victim’s apartment because Schiro believed Wimberly was the victim’s brother.
- This Schiro → Yahn → Osman chain was the only evidence identifying Wimberly as the perpetrator.

## Issues

1. Whether Osman was a “qualified” law enforcement officer who could relate hearsay at the preliminary hearing under Penal Code § 872(b).
2. Whether Penal Code § 872(b) permitted the prosecution to rely on the Schiro → Yahn → Osman multiple-hearsay chain to establish probable cause.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal held Osman was qualified to testify to hearsay at the preliminary hearing under Penal Code § 872(b).
- The Court of Appeal held the multiple-hearsay statements linking Wimberly to the crimes were inadmissible because the prosecution failed to establish a reasonable basis to believe they were reliable.
- The court affirmed the superior court’s order granting the Penal Code § 995 motion and setting aside the information.

## Legal Principles

- Penal Code § 872(b) permits a magistrate to consider hearsay testimony at a preliminary hearing when offered through a qualified law enforcement witness and supported by a reasonable basis for reliability.
- Proposition 115’s preliminary-hearing hearsay procedure does not allow the prosecution to prove probable cause through unchecked multiple hearsay; reliability must be shown for the hearsay relied upon.
- When the only evidence tying a defendant to the crime is a layered hearsay chain lacking an adequate reliability foundation, the commitment is not supported by competent evidence and an information may be set aside under Penal Code § 995.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed dismissal of the information because, although the testifying detective was qualified to convey hearsay at the preliminary hearing, the prosecution’s sole evidence identifying the defendant consisted of unreliable multiple hearsay that did not satisfy Penal Code § 872(b)’s reliability requirement.


People v. Wimberly, 5 Cal. App. 4th 439 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992)