I have an appeal that I am working on and one of the points of error I am trying to wrap my head around how to answer.

Long story short - 2 statements were taken from witnesses and a letter. State moved to admit. Defense objected as to hearsay. It was sustained.
A little later, it appeared to become admissible state moved to admit. Defense objected and again sustained. Officer did state that statements were taken from the named witnesses.

Now the appeal is that defendant's constitutional rights were violated under fundemental fairness grounds. I have no clue where to start answering where the defendant won their objections and now want a new trial. Ideas? Seems to be a straight up 6th/14th due process argument.

Was any other relief requested during trial? If not, Appellant got requested relief, therefore, error is not preserved.

I mean, no error.

Preservation -- he got the relief requested, so he can't complain about the court not doing something he didn't ask the court to do.

Merits -- The complained of evidence was never admitted (pursuant to D's objections). There can be no error in evidence that was not admitted.

Harm -- Because the evidence wasn't actually admitted, it can't possibly have caused any harm.