The trial court did not violate the defendant’s Sixth Amendment confrontation rights when it admitted a police dispatch tape over defense objection. Although the trial court erred in finding that the tape was admissible under Crawford v. Washington (2004) 541 U.S. 36 as a “business record,” most of the tape did not implicate the confrontation clause in any way because the officers heard on the tape testified at trial and were subject to cross-examination. The bulk of the remaining evidence on the tape was not admitted for the truth of the matter asserted, and thus did not implicate hearsay concerns. Finally, although a small portion of the tape may have been improperly admitted, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.