Law Commons^™

State V. Hudgen¸ 272 A.3d 1069 (R.I. 2022), Amanda Rotimi

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Losses And (Some) Statutory Wins For Criminal Defendants: Select Criminal Law And Procedure Cases From The Supreme Court's 2022-2023 Term., Eve Brensike Primus, Mark Rucci

Articles

The Supreme Court’s 2022–23 Term included a number of important statutory interpretation rulings, as well as significant cases concerning the scope of the Confrontation Clause; the Venue, Vicinage, and Double Jeopardy Clauses; the federal courts’ ability to entertain claims of legal innocence; and the contours of the adequate and independent state ground doctrine. It also was the first term for Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson—the first former public defender and first Black woman to join the centuries-old institution. Although Justice Jackson joined a Court ruptured along ideological lines and confronting serious challenges to its legitimacy and ethical standards, she quickly proved …

Limiting Access To Remedies: Select Criminal Law And Procedure Cases From The Supreme Court's 2021-22 Term, Eve Brensike Primus, Justin Hill

Articles

Although the most memorable cases from the Supreme Court’s 2021-22 Term were on the civil side of its docket, the Court addressed significant cases on the criminal side involving the Confrontation Clause, capital punishment, double jeopardy, criminal jurisdiction in Indian Country, and important statutory interpretation principles, such as the mens rea presumption and the scope of the rule of lenity. Looking back, the Court’s decisions limiting individuals’ access to remedies for violations of their constitutional criminal procedure rights stand out. Shinn v. Ramirez and Shoop v. Twyford drastically limit the ability of persons incarcerated in state facilities to challenge the …

Colorado's Undemanding Notice Requirement: Pro Se Defendants And Forensic Technician Testimony, Sarah M. Morris, Lauren L. Fontana

University of Denver Criminal Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confronting The Backdoor Admission Of Testimonial Statements Against An Accused: The Danger Of Expert Reliance On Inadmissible Information, Sarah E. Stout

University of Denver Criminal Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Man Behind The Curtain: Confronting Expert Testimony, Daniel W. Edwards

University of Denver Criminal Law Review

No abstract provided.

Complex Relationships: Public Policy And Law Solutions To Rebalance The Confrontation Clause, Evidence-Based Intimate-Partner Violence Prosecution, And Public And Private Violence After The Resurrection Of Roberts, Kira Eidson

Senior Theses and Projects

Following the Supreme Court’s 2004 decision in Crawford v. Washington, tensions between the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause and evidence-based prosecution of intimate-partner violence increased. In consequence, the Court forged a path of Constitutional jurisprudence which has weakened the power of the Confrontation Clause, reverted to a disguised reliability test reminiscent of Ohio v. Roberts, and diminished the rights of the accused. Simultaneously, these rulings have created a hierarchy where the severity of private, domestic violence is regarded as a lower level of emergency than public violence. Consequently, the Supreme Court’s primary purpose test for testimonial statements should be …

Calling Crawford: Minnesota Declares A 911 Call Non-Testimonial In State V. Wright, Alistair Y. Raymond

Maine Law Review

In State v. Wright, 1 the State of Minnesota charged David Wright with possession of a firearm by a felon and two counts of second-degree assault against his girlfriend and her sister. A jury found Wright guilty on all charges and sentenced him to sixty months in jail for each crime, with sentences served concurrently. Wright’s girlfriend, R.R., and her sister, S.R., did not testify against him at trial. The prosecution, however, used the transcript of a 911 call placed by R.R. against Wright in the trial. Although the 911 call was hearsay, the court admitted it under Minnesota’s excited …

Criminal Law—When The Pillow Talks: Arkansas's Rape Shield Statute Bars Dna Evidence Excluding The Defendant As The Source Of Semen. Thacker V. State, 2015 Ark. 406, 474 S.W.3d 65., Lacon Marie Smith

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Crawford's Last Stand? What Melendez-Diaz V. Massachusetts Means For The Confrontation Clause And For Criminal Trials, Elizabeth Stevens

ConLawNOW

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts heralds a dramatic change for Confrontation Clause jurisprudence and for most criminal trials. Crawford v. Washington held that “testimonial” statements were admissible only if the accused had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the witness. Melendez-Diaz applied this rule to forensic evidence, holding that certificates of analysis – used in a drug trail to prove the nature and weight of the proscribed substances, and sworn to and signed by the analysts who performed the tests – are testimonial.

This article analyzes Melendez-Diaz’s implications for the Court’s Confrontation Clause jurisprudence and for the …

Lilly V. Virginia: Silencing The "Firmly Rooted" Hearsay Exception With Regard To An Accomplice's Testimony And Its Rejuvenation Of The Confrontation Clause, Leslie Morsek

Akron Law Review

This Note examines the impact on the confrontation clause of introducing an accomplice's custodial statements which inculpate a defendant. Part II delves into the background of this issue by examining the confrontation clause's origin, the significance of hearsay with respect to the confrontation clause, and important cases in this area. Part III provides a statement of the facts, the procedural history, and the United States Supreme Court's decision in Lilly. Finally, Part IV analyzes the Lilly decision and its rejuvenation of the confrontation clause.

Finding Nino: Justice Scalia's Confrontation Clause Legacy From Its (Glorious) Beginning To (Bitter) End, Joëlle Anne Moreno Professor

Akron Law Review

Until very recently, Justice Scalia has steered the Court’s modern confrontation jurisprudence. However, as discussed below, his leadership is increasingly threatened by deep divisions on questions of historical accuracy, constitutional interpretation, and the practical realities of twenty-first century criminal prosecutions.

Judge Levine: A Survey Of His Most Influential Court Of Appeals Decisions - 1993-2002, Jean D'Alessandro

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Domestic Violence And The Confrontation Clause: The Case For A Prompt Post-Arrest Confrontation Hearing, Robert M. Hardaway

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

Part I and Part II of this article discuss the consequences of Crawford v. Washington for domestic violence victims and detail the problem of domestic violence in America, including the current prosecution strategies and challenges in domestic violence cases. Part III reviews the evolution of confrontation law jurisprudence. Part IV sets forth a proposed Crawford-compliant procedure that also protects domestic violence victims. Part V addresses anticipated objections to the prompt-post arrest confrontation hearing.

Coy V. Iowa: A Constitutional Right Of Intimidation, John A. Mayers

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Thank You For Testifying: The Need To Re-Examine Admission Of Expert Testimony Under Rule 703 In Relation To The Confrontation Clause In Light Of Williams V. Illinois, Derek Regensburger

Derek Regensburger

In Williams v. Illinois, the Supreme Court, in a plurality opinion, held that the basis evidence underlying an expert’s opinion may be introduced in a criminal trial without violating the Confrontation Clause. The Court also created a new primary purpose test for determining the testimonial nature of statements. Hearsay statements must now be both formalized statements made with the purpose of providing evidence against the accused as well as being made against a targeted individual. The ruling has the potential to impact the way in which testimonial hearsay statements are analyzed by court, and it could open the door for …

Criminal Law And Procedure, Virginia B. Theisen

University of Richmond Law Review

Once more, the past year yielded a wealth of developments in the area of criminal law and procedure. The author has endeavored to cull the most significant decisions and legislative enactments, with an eye toward the "takeaway" from a case rather than a discussion of settled principles.

Reconsidering Spousal Privileges After Crawford, R. Michael Cassidy

R. Michael Cassidy

In this article the author explores how domestic violence prevention efforts have been adversely impacted by the Supreme Court’s new “testimonial” approach to the confrontation clause. Examining the Court’s trilogy of cases from Crawford to Davis and Hammon, the author argues that the introduction of certain forms of hearsay in criminal cases has been drastically limited by the court’s new originalist approach to the Sixth Amendment. The author explains how state spousal privilege statutes often present a significant barrier to obtaining live testimony from victims of domestic violence. The author then argues that state legislatures should reconsider their spousal privilege …

A Defense Attorney’S Guide To Confrontation After Michigan V. Bryant, Kathryn K. Polonsky

Kathryn K Polonsky

In 1603, the Crown charged Sir Walter Raleigh with high treason in part for plotting to murder King James I. In preparing for trial, Lord Cobham, Raleigh’s alleged co-conspirator, was interrogated and signed a sworn confession. During trial, the King used the Crown-procured ex parte testimony of Cobham against Raleigh. Raleigh demanded Cobham be brought before the court so Raleigh might interrogate him “face to face.” Raleigh was sure Cobham would prove his innocence. After all, Cobham had written a letter stating his charges against Raleigh contained no truth.

The Judges refused to allow Raleigh the use of Cobham’s exonerating …

Criminal Law And Procedure, Marla G. Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

The authors have endeavored to select from the many appellate cases those that have the most significant precedential value. The article also outlines some of the most consequential changes tothe law enacted by the Virginia General Assembly in the areas ofcriminal law and procedure.

Forfeiture By Wrongdoing: A Panacea For Victimless Domestic Violence Prosecutions, Andrew King-Ries

Faculty Law Review Articles

In this article the author explores whether the rule of forfeiture by wrongdoing is the post-Crawford panacea for victimless domestic violence prosecutions. Section II briefly discusses the Crawford decision and the revitalization of the Confrontation Clause. The author highlights Crawford's recognition of the rule of forfeiture by wrongdoing and the traditional concept of forfeiture by wrongdoing. Section III presents difficulties with the rule of forfeiture by wrongdoing in the domestic violence context. In Section IV the author proposes solutions to these difficulties along with the additional requirements that are necessary when applying the rule in domestic violence cases …

The Lessons Of People V. Moscat: Confronting Judicial Bias In Domestic Violence Cases Interpreting Crawford V. Washington, David Jaros

All Faculty Scholarship

Crawford v. Washington was a groundbreaking decision that radically redefined the scope of the Confrontation Clause. Nowhere has the impact of Crawford and the debate over its meaning been stronger than in the context of domestic violence prosecutions. The particular circumstances that surround domestic violence cases 911 calls that record cries for help and accusations, excited utterances made to responding police officers, and the persistent reluctance of complaining witnesses to cooperate with prosecutors -- combine to make the introduction of "out-of-comment statements" a critical component of many domestic violence prosecutions. Because domestic violence cases are subject to a unique set …

The Crawford Issue- The Supreme Court Sharpens The Teeth Of The Confrontation Clause, Nathan Reed Haines

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Child Sex Abuse Victims: How Will Their Stories Be Heard After Crawford V. Washington?, Erin Thompson

Campbell Law Review

This comment focuses on the Confrontation Clause's interpretation throughout history and demonstrates the adverse effects the current state of the law has on child sex abuse victims like Alice and Bonnie. As such, the United States Supreme Court should declare that current statutory protections for child sex abuse victims are valid exceptions to the Confrontation Clause. Additionally, states should be encouraged to establish these statutes where they do not exist.

Right To Cross-Examine

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Right Of Confrontation, Justice Scalia, And The Power And Limits Of Textualism, Bryan H. Wildenthal

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confrontation Clause

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confrontation Clause

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fourth, Fifth, And Sixth Amendments, William E. Hellerstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confrontation Clause

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.