recognizing that the common law doctrine is “coextensive with” Federal Rule 804(b)(6), which is a hearsay exception that does not require a showing of reliability as a condition of admissibility
How later courts described this case
- recognizing that the common law doctrine is “coextensive with” Federal Rule 804(b)(6), which is a hearsay exception that does not require a showing of reliability as a condition of admissibility
- holding that child's statements to registered nurse and social worker were testimonial both because they were mandated reporters and because they were cooperating with law enforcement
- stating that a mistrial based on the jury’s failure to agree on a verdict was illustrative of the closeness of the evidence
- holding that statement to mother was nontestimonial because mother "was in no way acting on behalf of law enforcement, attempting to gather evidence for a future prosecution"
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
JUSTICE GARMAN, also dissenting:
I join in Chief Justice Thomas’ dissent with respect to his harmless error analysis. I do not, however, join in his analysis of the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing issue. In my view, the admissible evidence was sufficient to support defendant’s convictions. Accordingly, it is unnecessary to address any of the other issues raised in this appeal.