Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2260015273> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 48 of
48
with 100 items per page.
- W2260015273 abstract "Four years ago Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's “original intention of the framers” approach to constitutional interpretation gained a major foothold with an emerging majority of the U.S. Supreme Court in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004). This, of course, is the case that altered the methodology for judicial interpretation of the relationship of the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment and a variety of rules of evidence that permit the receipt of hearsay in criminal cases.For almost a quarter century preceding Crawford, federal and state courts had struggled to apply the doctrine of Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56 (1980). While recognizing the core value protected by the Confrontation Clause to be a criminal defendant’s right to in court cross-examination of adverse witnesses, the Roberts Court concluded that it was nevertheless consistent with the receipt of certain kinds of hearsay evidence from “unavailable” witnesses, so long as there were adequate “indicia of reliability.” Moreover, “Reliability can be inferred without more in a case where the evidence falls within a firmly rooted hearsay exception.” But this did not define the limits of constitutionally acceptable hearsay, so long as the proponent could show “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.” Id. at 64-66. [This reminds me of a cartoon I once saw in the New Yorker depicting a lawyer standing up in court and saying to the judge, “Your honor, I know it’s hearsay – but it’s damn good hearsay!”]Finding the Roberts approach inherently unpredictable and at odds with the “original intent” of the framers of the Confrontation Clause, Justice Scalia’s opinion for the Court recast the inquiry. Instead of looking at the reliability (truth) of a hearsay statement, the focus should be on the manner or procedure by which the statement was obtained for use as evidence. Viewed from this perspective, only those hearsay exceptions that permit the receipt of uncross-examinable “testimonial” statements run afoul of the Confrontation guarantee.Like all ground breaking decisions, Crawford raises more questions than it answers, and that will be the focus of our discussion. Keep in mind, however, that Crawford and its burgeoning progeny address a narrow range of issues that arise in applying the hearsay rules. For the most part, hearsay legal doctrine is left undisturbed." @default.
- W2260015273 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W2260015273 creator A5005686403 @default.
- W2260015273 date "2008-01-01" @default.
- W2260015273 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
- W2260015273 title "Litigating Crawford v. Washington: 'Testimonial' Hearsay, and the Right to Confrontation and Cross Examination" @default.
- W2260015273 doi "https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2278342" @default.
- W2260015273 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
- W2260015273 type Work @default.
- W2260015273 sameAs 2260015273 @default.
- W2260015273 citedByCount "0" @default.
- W2260015273 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2260015273 hasAuthorship W2260015273A5005686403 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConcept C112698675 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConcept C2778102385 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConcept C2778637750 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConcept C2780066029 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConceptScore W2260015273C112698675 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConceptScore W2260015273C144133560 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConceptScore W2260015273C15744967 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConceptScore W2260015273C17744445 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConceptScore W2260015273C199539241 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConceptScore W2260015273C2778102385 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConceptScore W2260015273C2778637750 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConceptScore W2260015273C2780066029 @default.
- W2260015273 hasConceptScore W2260015273C95457728 @default.
- W2260015273 hasLocation W22600152731 @default.
- W2260015273 hasOpenAccess W2260015273 @default.
- W2260015273 hasPrimaryLocation W22600152731 @default.
- W2260015273 hasRelatedWork W133089690 @default.
- W2260015273 hasRelatedWork W143293251 @default.
- W2260015273 hasRelatedWork W2342486671 @default.
- W2260015273 hasRelatedWork W2593405715 @default.
- W2260015273 hasRelatedWork W259801148 @default.
- W2260015273 hasRelatedWork W2766460560 @default.
- W2260015273 hasRelatedWork W30034910 @default.
- W2260015273 hasRelatedWork W3122500279 @default.
- W2260015273 hasRelatedWork W3123235933 @default.
- W2260015273 hasRelatedWork W3123904657 @default.
- W2260015273 isParatext "false" @default.
- W2260015273 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W2260015273 magId "2260015273" @default.
- W2260015273 workType "article" @default.