Skip navigation
Punch and Jurists

Crawford v. Washington, No. 02-9410 (U.S. Supreme Court) (541 U.S. 36; 124 S.Ct. 1354) (March 8, 2004) (Justice Scalia)

Loaded on Feb. 1, 2004 published in Punch and Jurists February 16, 2004
Filed under: Punch And Jurists.

The Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause provides that “in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him.” In 1980, the Supreme Court interpreted that right to mean that it does not bar the admission of an unavailable witness’ statement ...

 

Full article and associated cases available to subscribers.

As a digital subscriber to Punch and Jurists, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login

More from this issue:

  1. Crawford v. Washington, No. 02-9410 (U.S. Supreme Court) (541 U.S. 36; 124 S.Ct. 1354) (March 8, 2004) (Justice Scalia)
  2. Miller-El v. Dretke, No. 00-10784 (5th Cir.) (361 F.3d 849) (February 26, 2004) (Judge Harold R. Jr. DeMoss)
  3. U.S. v. Nava-Sotelo, No. 02-2338 (10th Cir.) (354 F.3d 1202) (December 31, 2003) (Judge Terrence L. O'Brien)
  4. Iowa v. Tovar, No. 02-1541 (U.S. Supreme Court) (541 U.S. 77; 124 S.Ct. 1379) (March 8, 2004) (Justice Ginsburg)
  5. U.S. v. Kneuppel, No. 03 CV 0536(NG)(MDG) (E.D.N.Y.) (293 F.Supp.2d 199) (November 17, 2003) (Judge Nina Gershon)
  6. U.S. v. Searcy, No. CR 95-AR-0103-E (N.D.Ala.) (293 F.Supp.2d 1248) (November 10, 2003) (Judge William M. Jr. Acker)

More from these topics: