Mixon v. State

¶1Appellant’s conviction is AFFIRMED. The error, if any, in admitting the victim’s out-of-court statement to Deputy Bates, was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. A harmless error analysis applies to the recent United States Supreme Court decision of Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 124 S.Ct. 1354, 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004). See, e.g., United States v. Rodriguez-Marrero, 390 F.3d 1, 17-18 (1st Cir.2004); United States v. Jones, 393 F.3d 107, 109 (2d Cir.2004); United States v. Robinson, 389 F.3d 582, 593 (6th Cir.2004); United States v. Gilbert, 391 F.3d 882, 884 (7th Cir.2004); Williams v. United States, 858 A.2d 978, 981 (D.C.2004); Porter v. State, 278 Ga. 694, 606 S.E.2d 240, 243 (2004); Vigil v. State, 98 P.3d 172, 179 (Wyo.2004); *497Somervell v. State, 883 So.2d 836, 839 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).