Evidence- Confrontation Clause

Question 1

Step 3 of Hearsay Exceptions

Answer 1

Look to see if any of the exceptions violates the fundamental right to confrontation.

Question 2

Step 3- Only for Criminal cases, why?

Answer 2

Allows the D to face the W in open court for truth testing examination
2) Allows the jury to fully decide on the credibility of the W.

Question 3

Testimonial vs. Non-testimonial- Results

Answer 3

Testimonial- violates confrontation clause and is inadmissible unless declarant is produced for cross.

Non-testimonial- admissible for wtvr hearsay exception.

Bear in mind that non hearsay does not get this evaluation. Case where he says PE forced copy of admission. PE introduces admission NOT for hearsay but to compare the admissions

Question 4

Testimonial Test

Answer 4

Is the primary motivation of the statement for use in criminal/investigations?

1) Objective Test- Whether a reasonable participant would consider the primary motivation to be to establish or prove past event relevant to criminal prosecution.
2) If it is in response to an ongoing emergency then it is unlikely that the primary motivation was for litigation and not stopping the emergency. 3) The more formal, the more likely to be tesimonial. 4) Whether both parties share a primary motive to get the statement into a criminal prosecution.

Question 5

Example Cases

Answer 5

Bryant- statement identifying shooter primarily meant to end the threat.

Davis- 911 call breaking down crime, meant to end threat and not testimonial.

Question 6

Not Testimonial

Answer 6

Basically not testimonial if said to non-law enforcement officer.

Even if have a duty to report- if would report anyway (teacher) then for sure not testimonial but even if not there are usually other reasons to report (pharmacy is for limits of drug abuse).

Question 7

Forensic Report/certifications

Answer 7

There is no other reason to prepare these than litigation. Therefore, the D has a right to call the witness who certified the result and cross him.