Michigan v. Bryant – and the confrontation clause

Michigan v. Bryant,  22 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S813 (Feb 28, 2011):  Justice Sotomayor wrote the opinion, Justice Thomas concurred, Justice Scalia dissented – What is testimonial and what is an “on-going” emergency is delved into and how hearsay and the rules of evidence touch upon all this, in this follow up to Crawford.

Trial court allowed in statements (regarding identity of assailant) of a man shot through the tummy that, within hours died.  Appellate court affirmed.  Michigan Supreme Court reversed for new trial, citing Crawford among other cases.  State appealed to the Super Supremes.  Issued centered on what is an “on-going emergency” to determine whether statements are testimonial.  USSCt reversed the Michigan Supremes and found responses to questioning by police, in this instance, were not testimonial under the confrontation clause.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: