enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Crawford v. Washington - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crawford_v._Washington

    Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004), is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision that reformulated the standard for determining when the admission of hearsay statements in criminal cases is permitted under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. The Court held that prior testimonial statements of witnesses who have since ...

  3. Confrontation Clause - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confrontation_Clause

    v. t. e. The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to be confronted with the witnesses against him." The right only applies to criminal prosecutions, not civil cases or other proceedings.

  4. Davis v. Washington - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis_v._Washington

    Washington, Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause. Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (2006), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States and written by Justice Antonin Scalia that established the test used to determine whether a hearsay statement is "testimonial" for Confrontation Clause purposes.

  5. Pointer v. Texas - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointer_v._Texas

    Pointer v. Texas, 380 U.S. 400 (1965), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of the right of to confront accusers in state court proceedings. The Sixth Amendment in the Bill of Rights states that, in criminal prosecutions, the defendant has a right "...to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to ...

  6. Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Amendment_to_the...

    In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for ...

  7. Michigan v. Bryant - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_v._Bryant

    Michigan v. Bryant, 562 U.S. 344 (2011), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court further developed the "primary purpose" test to determine whether statements are "testimonial" for Confrontation Clause purposes. [1] In Bryant, the Court expanded upon the test first articulated in Davis v. Washington, "addressing for the first ...

  8. Washington v. Texas - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_v._Texas

    Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14 (1967), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court decided that the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution (guaranteeing the right of a criminal defendant to force the attendance of witnesses for their side) is applicable in state courts as well as federal courts. [1]

  9. Bullcoming v. New Mexico - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullcoming_v._New_Mexico

    Bullcoming v. New Mexico, 564 U.S. 647 (2011), is a significant 6th Amendment Confrontation Clause case decided by the United States Supreme Court.On June 23, 2011, the Supreme Court considered the issue whether a defendant's Confrontation Clause rights extend to a non-testifying laboratory analyst whose supervisor testifies as to test results that the analyst transcribed from a machine.