State v. Martinez, 407 S.W.3d 669

Appellant Anthony Martinez was convicted of two counts of second-degree domestic assault, one count of first-degree domestic assault, and one count of armed criminal action, with ten-year sentences on each count to run concurrently.
The offenses occurred on August 16, 2011, at Martinez and Victim Lourdes Lozada’s residence; Victim reported being choked, hit, threatened with a knife, and held down, with visible injuries.
Two Spanish-speaking neighbors translated Victim’s statements for police and testified at trial; Victim later testified the statements were false and that no physical abuse occurred.
The State introduced two exhibits (State’s Exhibits 1 and 2) alleged to be Florida felony convictions of Martinez to prove prior offenses for sentencing purposes.
Martinez challenged the admissibility of the hearsay statements by the translator and the sufficiency of the evidence without those statements, and challenged the foundation for the Florida conviction exhibits.
The court affirmed Martinez’s convictions and addressed evidentiary objections, including hearsay, sufficiency, and foundation for prior-conviction documents.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Hearsay evidence admissibility of Besares’ testimony	Martinez: Besares’ statements were inadmissible hearsay.	State: Statements fall within exceptions or are admissible as inconsistent statements.	No reversible error; admissibility within court’s discretion; statements not prejudicial.
Sufficiency of evidence independent of hearsay	Martinez: Without Besares’ statements, insufficient evidence for counts.	State: Victim’s testimony and other evidence support elements.	Evidence sufficient to sustain three counts of domestic assault and one count of armed criminal action.
Admission of State’s Florida-prior-conviction exhibits	Martinez: Exhibits lacked proper certification under §490.130.	State: Objection was not specific to signature requirement; foundation lacking, but not preserved.	Point II denied; failure to preserve objection given trial-specific context.
Foundation for prior-offender designation (Florida convictions)	Martinez: Exhibits do not meet statutory-foundation requirements for out-of-state records.	State: Records improperly challenged but admissible with proper foundation.	Rejected; exhibits not properly challenged on the identified basis; admissible.

State v. Freeman, 269 S.W.3d 422 (Mo.banc 2008) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary rulings; hearsay rule exceptions)
State v. Douglas, 131 S.W.3d 818 (Mo.App. W.D.2004) (hearsay admissibility and exceptions in criminal trials)
State v. Garner, 14 S.W.3d 67 (Mo.App.E.D.1999) (inconsistent statements admissible as substantive evidence)
State v. Steele, 314 S.W.3d 845 (Mo.App.W.D.2010) (prejudice not found when declarant testifies and is cross-examined)
State v. Boydston, 198 S.W.3d 671 (Mo.App.S.D.2006) (objection specificity and preservation principles)
State v. Monroe, 18 S.W.3d 455 (Mo.App.S.D.2000) (requirements for admissibility of out-of-state convictions)
State v. Young, 366 S.W.2d 386 (Mo.1963) (minimum requirements for proving prior convictions)