1 / 13

Crawford v. Washington US Supreme Court, March 2004

Crawford v. Washington US Supreme Court, March 2004. Implications for Courts NYC Elder Abuse Training Project. Decision impacts:. Evidence procedures Special considerations to older and child witnesses Defendants confrontation rights Priority of hearsay exceptions.

jafari
Download Presentation

Crawford v. Washington US Supreme Court, March 2004

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Crawford v. WashingtonUS Supreme Court, March 2004 Implications for Courts NYC Elder Abuse Training Project

  2. Decision impacts: • Evidence procedures • Special considerations to older and child witnesses • Defendants confrontation rights • Priority of hearsay exceptions

  3. Before Crawford • Judge could admit “reliable” evidence without victim appearing • Child victims • Elder victims • Per Roberts v. Ohio, hearsay exceptions first, then “reliability”

  4. After Crawford • Witness must be cross-examined • Defendant’s 6th Amendment confrontation right primary

  5. Crawford applies only when: • Case is criminal • Witness is unavailable to testify • Statement is “testimonial” • Defense has not had an opportunity to cross examine the witness

  6. Testimonial • Key term • Not defined in decision • Decision offers factors to consider

  7. Factors to consider • Statement casual or overheard? • Declarant an accuser making formal statement to gov’t officers? • Could declarant reasonably expect statement to be used at trial? • Contained in formalized material? • Knowingly given in response to police questioning?

  8. Likely “testimonial” • Police investigations • Statements disputed by another party in court • Joint interviews by police and social workers • Some 911 tapes (e.g., to report a crime)

  9. Likely not testimonial • Offhand remarks to police • Medical notes and diagnoses • Social agency records if they qualify under the “business rule” exception • Some 911 tapes (e.g., to seek aid)

  10. Hearsay exceptions endorsed • Dying declarations • Business records (but not testimonial) • Statements in furtherance (but not testimonial)

  11. Exceptions upheld in recent cases • Statements by conspirators in furtherance • Business records • Present sense impressions • Excited utterances • State of mind • Residual exception

  12. Case law split • Testimoniality of 911 tapes • Testimoniality of interactions with police officers • Hundreds of confrontation cases since March 2004 decision

  13. Appeals • Crawford applies to current cases • Once verdict final, state or habeas appeals not accepted if defendant did not argue confrontation previously • Hundreds of confrontation cases since March 2004 decision

More Related