Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 2013–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Crawford v. Washingtongreen2 sentences2017Crawford, 541 U.S. at 68…. 2017The High Court in Crawford [v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004)] … rejected the indicia of reliability standard which it had applied previously in Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56 … (1980) as violative of the Sixth Amendment and fundamentally altered Confrontation Clause jurisprudence with regard to testimonial hearsay when it held that the Confrontation Clause prohibits the admission of testimonial hearsay against a criminal defendant, regardless of whether the statements are deemed reliable by the trial court, unless the declarant is unavailable to testify and the defendant had a previous opportun | 1 | 4 |
Commonwealth v. Allshousegreen2 sentences2014Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 , 124 S. Ct. 1354 (2004); Commonwealth v. Allshouse, 614 Pa. 229 , 36 A.3d 163, 175-76 (2012); In the interest of: N.C., 74 A.3d 271 (Pa. Super. 2013). 2014Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 , 124 S. Ct. 1354 (2004); Commonwealth v. Allshouse, 614 Pa. 229 , 36 A.3d 163, 175-76 (2012); In the interest of: N.C., 74 A.3d 271 (Pa. Super. 2013). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ohio v. Roberts
red
2 sentences2018As a result, both courts continued to apply the Confrontation Clause to non -testimonial hearsay through the indicia of reliability test established in Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56 (1980), which decision was partially abrogated by Crawford. 2017The High Court in Crawford [v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004)] … rejected the indicia of reliability standard which it had applied previously in Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56 … (1980) as violative of the Sixth Amendment and fundamentally altered Confrontation Clause jurisprudence with regard to testimonial hearsay when it held that the Confrontation Clause prohibits the admission of testimonial hearsay against a criminal defendant, regardless of whether the statements are deemed reliable by the trial court, unless the declarant is unavailable to testify and the defendant had a previous opportun | 3 | 2014–2018 |
In the Interest of N.C.
green
1 sentence2014Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 , 124 S. Ct. 1354 (2004); Commonwealth v. Allshouse, 614 Pa. 229 , 36 A.3d 163, 175-76 (2012); In the interest of: N.C., 74 A.3d 271 (Pa. Super. 2013). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.