Search for: "Crawford v. United States" Results 81 - 100 of 485
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Mar 2010, 10:37 am
Two recent cases from New Mexico's Supreme Court apply the recent United States Supreme Court decision of Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 8:46 am
  Interestingly, I raised that issue again at trial in United States v. [read post]
18 Jun 2015, 2:40 pm by Kent Scheidegger
Eleven years ago, the US Supreme Court upended its jurisprudence of the Confrontation Clause in Crawford v. [read post]
15 Jul 2013, 11:45 am by Josh Douglas
 In particular, in both Washington State Grange, a challenge to a candidate's ballot designation of preferred political party on a ballot, and Crawford v. [read post]
12 Apr 2018, 7:31 am
Crawford, he did not try his scheme in the United States. [read post]
11 Jan 2018, 8:00 am by Dan Ernst
LaGrand (Germany v United States of America) (2001)Cameron Miles22. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 2:17 am by Michael DelSignore
Given Justice Thomas' vote in the Crawford decision, I do not believe he could find the statement non testimonial in this matter and expect that the United States Supreme Court would reverse the conviction. [read post]
2 Jan 2012, 8:21 am by Brian Shiffrin
"The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees a defendant the right to be confronted with the witnesses against him [or her]' " (People v Brown, 13 NY3d 332, 338). [read post]
21 Jun 2015, 2:51 am by Michael DelSignore
In a unanimous decision reached by differing concurring opinions, the Supreme Court of the United States finally resolved the question left open by Crawford asking whether statements made to persons other than law enforcement trigger the Confrontation Clause. [read post]
9 Jan 2008, 1:33 pm
United States, No. 07-6395, seeking review of United States v. [read post]
10 Mar 2011, 11:55 am by Richard D. Friedman
Adam Liptak of the New York Times has alerted me to an interesting decision issued yesterday by the Second Circuit in United States v. [read post]