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.
6 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 517 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Delaware v. Fensterer.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Delaware v. Fensterer Anchor | green | “the confrontation clause guarantees an opportunity for effective cross-examination, not cross-examination that is effective in whatever way, and to whatever extent, the defense might wish.” | 135 |
| 2 | Delaware v. Van Arsdall | green | “trial judges retain wide latitude insofar as the confrontation clause is concerned to impose reasonable limits on such cross-examination based on concerns about, among other things, harassment, prejudice, confusion of the issues, the witness' safety, or interrogation that is rep…” | 101 |
| 3 | Davis v. Alaska | green | “the main and essential purpose of confrontation is to secure for the opponent the opportunity of cross-examination.” | 98 |
| 4 | Delaware v. Van Arsdall | green | “the confrontation clause guarantees an opportunity for effective cross-examination, not cross-examination that is effective in whatever way, and to whatever extent, the defense might wish.” | 78 |
| 5 | Delaware v. Fensterer | green | “an opportunity for effective cross-examination, not cross-examination that is effective in whatever way, and to whatever extent, the defense might wish.” | 60 |
| 6 | Delaware v. Fensterer | green | “generally speaking, the confrontation clause guarantees an opportunity for effective cross-examination, not cross-examination that is effective in whatever way, and to whatever extent, the defense might wish.” | 45 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.