The United State Supreme Court in Davis v. Washington, 2006 decided:
A) That a 911 dispatcher could testify to what a 911 caller told them even if they identified the suspect.
B) That a 911 dispatcher testimony of what a 911 caller told them would be considered hearsay.
C) That 911 dispatchers could not testify because they could not positively identify a caller.
D) That a 911 dispatcher could testify to what a 911 caller told them but they could not identify the suspect.
Answer: A
You might also like to view...
Organized crime groups do not keep computerized records in a manner similar to businesses
a. True b. False
Describe how modern day technologies are assisting policing agencies to do their jobs more efficiently
What will be an ideal response
Officer Morris can be sued in state court for
a. the intentional tort of battery.
b. the negligence tort of assault.
c. Section 1983 civil rights.
d. None of the answers are correct.
The harmless error exception was first set forth by the Court in Chapman v. California (1967)
a. True b. False Indicate whether the statement is true or false