Determining reliability for confrontation clause admissibility
Also stated as: Ensuring reliability through confrontation clause elements
The pages courts cite for it
- Cited for: Determining reliability for confrontation clause admissibility
- Cited for: Ensuring reliability through confrontation clause analysis
- Cited for: Critiquing the amorphous nature of reliability under confrontation clause
- Cited for: Affirming reliability of statements under confrontation clause
- Cited for: Ensuring reliability through confrontation clause elements
- Cited for: Assessing statement reliability for confrontation clause analysis
- Cited for: Determining reliability of statements under confrontation clause
- Cited for: Determining reliability for confrontation clause admissibility
Ranked by how often Texas courts cite each page. The bar is how citing opinions treated that page (green followed, yellow questioned or limited, red negative); a red or yellow chip is the case’s own overall treatment.
Texas opinions citing these pages
- Zubiate, Leroy Hilbert, No. WR-95,541-01 (Tex. Crim. App. Mar. 26, 2025)
- FINLEY, TAYTON SETH v. State of Texas, 707 S.W.3d 320 (Tex. Crim. App. 2024)
- ELSIK, STEVEN JAMES v. State of Texas, 714 S.W.3d 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2024)
- Derrick Davenport v. State, No. 07-18-00403-CR (Tex. App.—Amarillo July 30, 2019)
- White, Brian Jason, No. PD-0442-17 (Tex. Crim. App. June 13, 2018)
- Balderas, Juan A/K/A Apache, No. AP-77,036 (Tex. Nov. 18, 2015)
- Davis, Franklin, No. AP-77,031 (Tex. Crim. App. Aug. 4, 2015)
- Marsh, Ricky Lynn, No. WR-77,371-01 (Tex. Crim. App. May 23, 2012)
- Darryl B. Wells v. State, No. 04-08-00668-CR (Tex. App.—San Antonio Apr. 14, 2010)
- Cedric James v. State, No. 06-09-00121-CR (Tex. App.—Texarkana Nov. 5, 2009)
- Vinson, Raymond Earl, No. PD-1540-06 (Tex. Crim. App. Jan. 16, 2008)
- Florence Fisher v. State, No. 06-06-00131-CR (Tex. App.—Texarkana Apr. 11, 2007)
- Manuel Caudillo Ramirez v. State, No. 03-05-00219-CR (Tex. App.—Austin Aug. 25, 2006)
From the opinions citing the top pages above (up to 400 per page are read), most pages cited first, then newest.
Nearest issues
- 96 opinions
- 81 opinions
- 47 opinions
- 53 opinions
- 64 opinions
- 179 opinions
- 42 opinions
- 138 opinions
Filed under: Confrontation; Clause; Hearsay
Where else it is alive
Opinions per jurisdiction citing these pages. A span that stops early can mean the doctrine was dropped there.
How this is built: each issue is a set of opinion pages that later courts cite for the same proposition, grouped from what the citing courts wrote. Names are machine-written from those citations; read the cases before relying on them. Search case law