Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
What Happened: Confronting Confrontation In The Wake Of Bullcoming, Bryant, And Crawford., Dibrell Waldrip, Sara M. Berkeley
What Happened: Confronting Confrontation In The Wake Of Bullcoming, Bryant, And Crawford., Dibrell Waldrip, Sara M. Berkeley
St. Mary's Law Journal
Crawford v. Washington and its progeny demonstrate the difficulty of delineating both the core and the perimeter of the Confrontation Clause. Crawford abrogated Ohio v. Roberts, forcing trial lawyers to re-evaluate the use of various types of hearsay formerly admitted upon a finding of adequate “indicia of reliability.” Later the Court issued two decisions further altering the contours of Confrontation Clause jurisprudence. Michigan v. Bryant and Bullcoming v. New Mexico. With these options, the old Roberts “indicia of reliability” test transformed into the new “primary purpose” test to identify certain testimonial statements. By significantly altering the contours of Confrontation Clause …
Congress's Consistent Intent To Utilize Military Commissions In The War Against Al-Qaeda And Its Adoption Of Commission Rules That Fully Comply With Due Process., Michael T. Mccaul, Ronald J. Sievert
Congress's Consistent Intent To Utilize Military Commissions In The War Against Al-Qaeda And Its Adoption Of Commission Rules That Fully Comply With Due Process., Michael T. Mccaul, Ronald J. Sievert
St. Mary's Law Journal
Congress responded to the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001 by passing the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). In the following years Congress augmented that authority with the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA of 2006) and the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (MCA of 2009). In passing these acts, Congress responded to the Supreme Court’s decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which found that President Bush’s attempt to establish military commissions required Congressional authorization. When drafting both MCAs, Congress recognized numerous evidentiary and trial procedures from federal civilian court were inappropriate for trying unlawful combatants. By these …
Utter Excitement About Nothing: Why Domestic Violence Evidence-Based Prosecution Will Survive Crawford V. Washington., Donna D. Bloom
Utter Excitement About Nothing: Why Domestic Violence Evidence-Based Prosecution Will Survive Crawford V. Washington., Donna D. Bloom
St. Mary's Law Journal
In response to domestic violence involving victims who do not wish to cooperate in the prosecution of their abuser, prosecutors endeavor to frame cases around other evidence establishing a defendant’s guilt regardless of the victim’s testimony. Domestic violence cases set for trial are being thrown out of Texas courts because of the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that reasserts a defendant’s right to confront his accuser in court. Prosecutors believe that strong legal arguments exist to continue successfully prosecuting abusers without the cooperation of the victim at trial. This is through the continued admission of certain hearsay statements, despite Crawford …