Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Admissible (1)
- Anglo-American law (1)
- Community supervision (1)
- Criminal Justice (1)
- Criminal constitutional jurisprudence (1)
-
- Hearsay (1)
- Incarnation. Legal financial obligation. Suspended license (1)
- Moral (1)
- Out-of-court statements (1)
- Policing (1)
- Prosecutorial decision-making. Pretrial release (1)
- Race (1)
- Reentry (1)
- Sentences (1)
- Supreme Court’s Confrontation Clause jurisprudence (1)
- Testimonial (1)
- Trial (1)
- Washington State (1)
- Washington Supreme Court (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Race And Washington’S Criminal Justice System: 2021 Report To The Washington Supreme Court, Task Force 2.0
Race And Washington’S Criminal Justice System: 2021 Report To The Washington Supreme Court, Task Force 2.0
Washington Law Review
RACE & WASHINGTON’S CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM:
EDITOR’S NOTE
As Editors-in-Chief of the Washington Law Review, Gonzaga Law Review, and Seattle University Law Review, we represent the flagship legal academic publications of each law school in Washington State. Our publications last joined together to publish the findings of the first Task Force on Race and the Criminal Justice System in 2011/12. A decade later, we are honored to join once again to present the findings of Task Force 2.0. Law journals have enabled generations of legal professionals to introduce, vet, and distribute new ideas, critiques of existing legal structures, and reflections …
The Dignitary Confrontation Clause, Erin Sheley
The Dignitary Confrontation Clause, Erin Sheley
Washington Law Review
For seventeen years, the Supreme Court’s Confrontation Clause jurisprudence has been confused and confusing. In Crawford v. Washington (2004), the Court overruled prior precedent and held that “testimonial” out-of-court statements could not be admitted at trial unless the defendant had an opportunity to cross-examine the declarant, even when the statement would be otherwise admissible as particularly reliable under an exception to the rule against hearsay. In a series of contradictory opinions over the next several years, the Court proceeded to expand and then seemingly roll back this holding, leading to widespread chaos in common types of cases, particularly those involving …