Crawford V Washington Rule

During crawford s trial prosecutors played for the jury his wife s tape recorded statement to the police describing the stabbing.

Crawford v washington rule. 36 2004 united states supreme court case facts key issues and holdings and reasonings online today. The court permitted the tape recorded statement into evidence. Washington case brief rule of law. Washington the court radically revamped the.

Petitioner was tried for assault and attempted murder. Written and curated by real attorneys at quimbee. Every bundle includes the complete text from each of the titles below. 36 2004 147 wash.

Washington case brief rule of law. The sixth amendment s confrontation clause provides that i n all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right. Crawford was charged with attempted murder and assault of a man who he alleged tried to rape his wife. Testimonial statements cannot be used against a defendant who is not given the opportunity to confront the.

The state sought to introduce a recorded statement that petitioner s wife sylvia had made during police interrogation as evidence that the stabbing was not in self defense. Hundreds of law school topic related videos from. Html version pdf version. W here testimonial statements are at issue the only indicium of reliability sufficient to satisfy constitutional demands is confrontation facts.

To be confronted with the witnesses against him 1 this protection applies to the states by way of the fourteenth amendment 2 3in crawford v. Washington supreme court of the united states. 2d 424 54 p 3d 656 reversed and remanded. Html version pdf version.

36 2004 is a united states supreme court decision that reformulated the standard for determining when the admission of hearsay statements in criminal cases is permitted under the confrontation clause of the sixth amendment the court held that cross examination is required to admit prior testimonial statements of witnesses who have since become unavailable. Petitioner stabbed a man who allegedly tried to rape hi. Petitioner was tried for assault and attempted murder. November 10 2003 decided.

Certiorari to the supreme court of washington. The jury convicted crawford for assault. Because it was pre recorded crawford could not cross examine the statement. Argued november 10 2003 decided march 8 2004.

The prosecution tried to introduce a recorded statement by crawford s wife where she described the stabbing. The new crawford rule. The statement contradicted crawford s argument that he stabbed the man in defense of his wife.