Search for: "Com. v. Crawford"
Results 81 - 100
of 123
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Dec 2010, 5:03 am
9th District re-emphasizes point that trial court is not required to articulate any reasons for imposing maximum or consecutive sentences… Crawford v. [read post]
16 Nov 2010, 3:45 am
In State v. [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 3:46 am
Ohio, but would now be testimonial under Crawford v. [read post]
27 May 2009, 3:56 am
California, the US Supreme Court’s decision on how forfeiture by wrongdoing applies to Crawford v. [read post]
4 Jan 2012, 3:38 am
Clark, which involved Crawford and hearsay statements of a child sex victim under hearsay under EvidR 807. [read post]
19 Mar 2012, 4:00 am
France… It was a Crawford violation to allow the State to have a state trooper testify as to the urine results, rather than the toxicologist or lab technician who performed the test, the 4th District holds in State v. [read post]
8 Feb 2011, 3:54 am
The court continues to do a good job with allied offenses, and does better with Crawford issues. [read post]
29 Oct 2012, 3:44 am
That’s the issue tackled by the 2nd District in State v. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 3:49 am
Massachusetts, the US Supreme Court held that the law violated Crawford v. [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 4:00 am
State v. [read post]
23 Sep 2011, 3:50 am
The latter point solves any Crawford problems, but it doesn’t solve the hearsay problem. [read post]
15 Jul 2010, 3:51 am
Massachusetts: is a “notice and demand statute” — a statute giving notice to a drug defendant of a chemist’s analysis of the drug, with an advisement that the analyst’s report will be admissible unless the defendant demands live testimony — consistent with the Confrontation Clause as defined by Crawford v. [read post]
27 Apr 2009, 3:25 am
There are still several key cases which were argued last fall, and could come out at any time, including the one involving the FCC’s “fleeting expletives policy,” discussed here, and the case concerning whether Crawford v. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 3:18 am
Hearsay is admissible in a hearing to revoke community control sanctions, but are testimonial statements barred by Crawford v. [read post]
