Explain and discuss how Crawford v. Washington (2004) made major changes in the law. Explain why you agree or disagree with the decision
What will be an ideal response?
The U.S. Supreme Court's 2004 decision in Crawford v. Washington, discussed more fully below, specifically overruled the key "indicia of reliability" case, Ohio v. Roberts. The Court held in Crawford that it is no longer enough that out-of-court statements have some "guarantee of trustworthiness", such as a recognized hearsay exception. Rather, the Court held, the "guarantee" of the Confrontation Clause was the defendant's right to confront and cross-examine those "who bear testimony" against him. A witness's "testimonial" statement is thus inadmissible unless (1) the witness is available to testify and appears at trial, or (2) the witness is unavailable but the defendant had an earlier opportunity for cross-examination of the witness. The second part of this response should be based on the knowledge of the impact this decision may have on the outcome a trial.
You might also like to view...
Almost half of all executions carried out in the US since 1977 are in Texas and New York
Indicate whether the statement is true or false
The _______ requires federally licensed firearms dealers to perform background checks on prospective firearms purchasers to ensure that the firearm transfer would not violate federal, state, or local law.
A. Brady Bill B. NRA Bill C. Check 21 Act D. National Firearms Act (NFA)
The ________________ view of elder abuse deals with economics and negotiated exchanges of material and nonmaterial goods
Fill in the blank(s) with correct word
Which legal disposition is the most common correctional treatment given to offenders?
a. probation c. prison b. jail d. parole