Knowledge

Whorton v. Bockting

Source 📝

31: 262:
under 10 years of age describing acts of sexual assault or physical abuse of the child may be admitted if the court finds that the child is unavailable or unable to testify and that "the time, content and circumstances of the statement provide sufficient circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness." The court found sufficient evidence of reliability to admit the testimony.
352:
criminal proceeding." There are two requirements for a holding to be a "watershed rule" First, the new rule must be "necessary to prevent an impermissibly large risk of an inaccurate conviction." Second, it must "alter our understanding of the bedrock procedural elements essential to the fairness of a proceeding."
261:
At trial, the court held a hearing to determine whether the victim could testify. Finding that Autumn was too distressed to be sworn in, the State moved to allow Laura Bockting and the detective to recount the victim's statements to the jury. Under Nevada law, out-of-court statements made by a child
351:
announced a new rule and because it is clear and undisputed that the rule is procedural and not substantive, that rule cannot be applied in this collateral attack on respondent’s conviction unless it is a watershed rul of criminal procedure implicating the fundamental fairness and accuracy of the
359:
did not meet the first requirement, as it was too limited in scope. It also did not meet the second requirement, in that it only slightly changed the cross-examination jurisprudence, but did not fundamentally alter it. Therefore, the Court held, it was not a "watershed rule" and did not apply
265:
After hearing the evidence, the jury found Bockting guilty of three counts of sexual assault on a minor under the age of 14, and the court imposed two consecutive life sentences and another concurrent life sentence.
304:
in which the Court held that testimony of witnesses absent from trial are admissible only where the declarant is unavailable, and only where the defendant has had a prior opportunity to
849: 758: 1858: 293:, making the same argument. The Court denied the petition, stating that Bockting was not entitled to relief under the habeas statute. Bockting appealed that decision to the 258:
indicted Bockting on four counts of sexual assault on a minor under 14 years of age. The victim testified at the preliminary hearing, and Bockting was held over for trial.
254:
of his wife Laura's six-year-old daughter. A police detective interviewed the victim in the presence of her mother, and physical evidence was gathered at a hospital. The
290: 452: 72: 294: 278:, alleging that by allowing the out-of-court statements to be read to the jury, the state had violated Bockting's confrontation clause rights under the 742: 529: 279: 1780: 1853: 1814: 520: 1863: 1868: 1621: 913: 1394: 825: 675: 490: 217: 35: 1580: 1541: 1442: 378: 312:
applied retroactively, and reversed the lower court decision. The State appealed, and the Supreme Court granted
1255: 1057: 833: 1092: 1423: 513: 1279: 972: 1485: 798: 790: 1374: 1167: 945: 782: 694: 555: 1760: 1589: 1568: 1271: 1175: 937: 921: 897: 702: 571: 1629: 1349: 1191: 1076: 1049: 1041: 881: 726: 506: 1533: 1303: 1223: 889: 841: 659: 299: 226: 102: 297:. While the appeal to the Ninth Circuit was pending, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in 54:
Glen Whorton, Director, Nevada Department of Corrections, Petitioner v. Marvin Howard Bockting
1790: 1645: 1605: 1509: 865: 734: 456: 64: 335:
apply retroactively to judgments in criminal cases that are already final on direct review?
1669: 1613: 1501: 1493: 1295: 1148: 873: 579: 275: 221: 203: 8: 1798: 1701: 1517: 1386: 1247: 1231: 980: 718: 667: 543: 498: 161: 463: 1822: 1768: 1693: 1661: 1549: 1402: 1263: 1127: 1012: 1004: 774: 766: 621: 472: 1685: 1677: 1525: 1469: 1461: 1330: 1207: 1084: 1020: 996: 988: 817: 305: 247: 129: 1806: 1725: 1653: 1597: 1311: 1183: 929: 67: 1215: 1199: 1032: 857: 563: 153: 141: 1741: 1717: 1709: 1477: 964: 750: 251: 165: 137: 87: 1847: 1733: 1287: 905: 710: 286: 1637: 613: 600: 344: 282:. That Court held that the admission of the testimony was constitutional. 231: 173: 149: 121: 481: 314: 255: 83: 106:
does not apply retroactively. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed.
420:
Bockting v. Bayer, 399 F. 3d 1010, as amended, 408 F. 3d 1127 (2005).
79: 86:
2826; 75 U.S.L.W. 4121; 72 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (Callaghan) 635; 44
434:
Whorton v. Bockting, 549 U.S. ___ (2006)(internal quotes omitted)
30: 528: 291:
United States District Court for the District of Nevada
1859:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court
411:
Bockting v. State, 109 Nev. 103, 847 P. 2d 1364 (1993)
295:
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
347:gave the unanimous opinion of the Court. "Because 1845: 1422: 1373: 514: 285:Bockting then filed a petition for a writ of 234:, writing for a unanimous Court, ruled that 379:"Nevada case may affect inmates nationwide" 308:the witness. The Ninth Circuit held that 246:The respondent, Marvin Howard Bockting, of 521: 507: 1815:Martinez v. Court of Appeal of California 641: 430: 428: 426: 1147: 376: 599: 542: 491:Supreme Court (slip opinion) (archived) 338: 1846: 1116: 423: 230:(2006) applied retroactively. Justice 1421: 1372: 1146: 1115: 640: 598: 541: 502: 377:Adrienne, Packer (October 22, 2006). 269: 18:2007 United States Supreme Court case 355:The Court found that the holding in 914:Southern Union Co. v. United States 13: 1395:United States v. Valenzuela-Bernal 826:Almendarez-Torres v. United States 676:Blanton v. City of North Las Vegas 360:retroactively to Bockting's case. 220:case about the application of the 36:Supreme Court of the United States 14: 1880: 1854:United States Supreme Court cases 1342:Restrictions on cross-examination 459:406 (2007) is available from: 441: 90:777; 20 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 99 29: 1443:United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez 1864:2007 in United States case law 1256:Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts 759:Rosales-Lopez v. United States 414: 405: 402:Nev. Rev. Stat. §51.385 (2003) 396: 370: 1: 1869:Confrontation Clause case law 530:United States Sixth Amendment 241: 238:did not apply retroactively. 216:, 549 U.S. 406 (2007), was a 1424:Assistance of Counsel Clause 7: 973:Rassmussen v. United States 321: 218:United States Supreme Court 10: 1885: 1323:Face-to-face confrontation 1093:Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado 791:McDonnell v. United States 482:Oyez (oral argument audio) 1779: 1752: 1579: 1560: 1453: 1434: 1430: 1417: 1381: 1375:Compulsory Process Clause 1368: 1341: 1322: 1168:Reynolds v. United States 1159: 1155: 1142: 1122: 1111: 1068: 1031: 956: 946:Erlinger v. United States 809: 799:United States v. Tsarnaev 783:Skilling v. United States 695:Reynolds v. United States 686: 651: 647: 636: 608: 594: 556:Klopfer v. North Carolina 550: 537: 274:Bockting appealed to the 202: 197: 186: 181: 115: 110: 100: 95: 59: 49: 45:Decided February 28, 2007 42: 28: 23: 1761:Massiah v. United States 1590:Strickland v. Washington 1569:Glasser v. United States 1542:Nichols v. United States 1272:Bullcoming v. New Mexico 1176:Dowdell v. United States 938:United States v. Haymond 922:Alleyne v. United States 898:Cunningham v. California 703:Glasser v. United States 572:Doggett v. United States 383:Las Vegas Review-Journal 363: 326: 1630:Glover v. United States 1350:Chambers v. Mississippi 1192:Bruton v. United States 1160:Out-of-court statements 1077:Tanner v. United States 1069:Impeachment of verdicts 1050:Burton v. United States 1042:United States v. Dawson 882:United States v. Booker 850:Harris v. United States 727:Witherspoon v. Illinois 43:Argued November 1, 2006 1753:Uncounseled statements 1581:Ineffective assistance 1534:Pennsylvania v. Finley 1304:Samia v. United States 1224:Crawford v. Washington 1058:Smith v. United States 890:Washington v. Recuenco 842:Apprendi v. New Jersey 834:Jones v. United States 660:Cheff v. Schnackenberg 300:Crawford v. Washington 227:Crawford v. Washington 103:Crawford v. Washington 1791:Faretta v. California 1646:Woodford v. Visciotti 1606:Kimmelman v. Morrison 1510:Argersinger v. Hamlin 866:Blakely v. Washington 735:Ham v. South Carolina 642:Impartial Jury Clause 204:U.S. Const. amend. VI 78:127 S. Ct. 1173; 167 1670:Wright v. Van Patten 1614:Lockhart v. Fretwell 1502:Anders v. California 1494:Gideon v. Wainwright 1296:Hemphill v. New York 1280:Williams v. Illinois 1149:Confrontation Clause 874:Schriro v. Summerlin 580:Betterman v. Montana 339:Opinion of the Court 276:Nevada Supreme Court 222:Confrontation Clause 1799:McKaskle v. Wiggins 1702:Padilla v. Kentucky 1518:Gagnon v. Scarpelli 1486:Hamilton v. Alabama 1387:Washington v. Texas 1248:Giles v. California 1240:Whorton v. Bockting 1232:Davis v. Washington 981:Williams v. Florida 719:Sheppard v. Maxwell 668:Duncan v. Louisiana 544:Speedy Trial Clause 449:Whorton v. Bockting 331:Did the holding in 213:Whorton v. Bockting 162:Ruth Bader Ginsburg 24:Whorton v. Bockting 1823:Indiana v. Edwards 1769:Brewer v. Williams 1694:Porter v. McCollum 1662:Holland v. Jackson 1622:Williams v. Taylor 1550:Alabama v. Shelton 1403:Taylor v. Illinois 1264:Michigan v. Bryant 1128:Rabe v. Washington 1117:Information Clause 1013:Ramos v. Louisiana 1005:Burch v. Louisiana 957:Size and unanimity 775:Morgan v. Illinois 767:Wainwright v. Witt 622:Presley v. Georgia 270:Procedural history 126:Associate Justices 1841: 1840: 1837: 1836: 1833: 1832: 1686:Wong v. Belmontes 1678:Bobby v. Van Hook 1526:Scott v. Illinois 1470:Johnson v. Zerbst 1462:Powell v. Alabama 1413: 1412: 1364: 1363: 1360: 1359: 1331:Maryland v. Craig 1208:Illinois v. Allen 1138: 1137: 1107: 1106: 1103: 1102: 1085:Warger v. Shauers 1021:Edwards v. Vannoy 997:Ballew v. Georgia 989:Apodaca v. Oregon 818:Walton v. Arizona 632: 631: 590: 589: 250:, was accused of 248:Las Vegas, Nevada 209: 208: 190:Alito, joined by 1876: 1807:Rock v. Arkansas 1726:Lafler v. Cooper 1654:Wiggins v. Smith 1598:Nix v. Whiteside 1432: 1431: 1419: 1418: 1370: 1369: 1312:Smith v. Arizona 1184:Pointer v. Texas 1157: 1156: 1144: 1143: 1113: 1112: 930:Hurst v. Florida 743:Ristaino v. Ross 649: 648: 638: 637: 596: 595: 539: 538: 523: 516: 509: 500: 499: 495: 489: 486: 480: 477: 471: 468: 462: 435: 432: 421: 418: 412: 409: 403: 400: 394: 393: 391: 389: 374: 111:Court membership 33: 32: 21: 20: 1884: 1883: 1879: 1878: 1877: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1844: 1843: 1842: 1829: 1775: 1748: 1575: 1556: 1449: 1426: 1409: 1377: 1356: 1337: 1318: 1216:Ohio v. Roberts 1200:Frazier v. Cupp 1151: 1134: 1118: 1099: 1064: 1033:Vicinage Clause 1027: 952: 858:Ring v. Arizona 805: 682: 643: 628: 604: 586: 564:Barker v. Wingo 546: 533: 527: 493: 487: 484: 478: 475: 469: 466: 460: 444: 439: 438: 433: 424: 419: 415: 410: 406: 401: 397: 387: 385: 375: 371: 366: 341: 329: 324: 280:Sixth Amendment 272: 244: 164: 154:Clarence Thomas 152: 142:Anthony Kennedy 140: 130:John P. Stevens 91: 44: 38: 19: 12: 11: 5: 1882: 1872: 1871: 1866: 1861: 1856: 1839: 1838: 1835: 1834: 1831: 1830: 1828: 1827: 1819: 1811: 1803: 1795: 1786: 1784: 1783:representation 1777: 1776: 1774: 1773: 1765: 1756: 1754: 1750: 1749: 1747: 1746: 1742:Garza v. Idaho 1738: 1730: 1722: 1718:Premo v. Moore 1714: 1710:Sears v. Upton 1706: 1698: 1690: 1682: 1674: 1666: 1658: 1650: 1642: 1634: 1626: 1618: 1610: 1602: 1594: 1585: 1583: 1577: 1576: 1574: 1573: 1564: 1562: 1558: 1557: 1555: 1554: 1546: 1538: 1530: 1522: 1514: 1506: 1498: 1490: 1482: 1478:Betts v. Brady 1474: 1466: 1457: 1455: 1451: 1450: 1448: 1447: 1438: 1436: 1428: 1427: 1415: 1414: 1411: 1410: 1408: 1407: 1399: 1391: 1382: 1379: 1378: 1366: 1365: 1362: 1361: 1358: 1357: 1355: 1354: 1345: 1343: 1339: 1338: 1336: 1335: 1326: 1324: 1320: 1319: 1317: 1316: 1308: 1300: 1292: 1284: 1276: 1268: 1260: 1252: 1244: 1236: 1228: 1220: 1212: 1204: 1196: 1188: 1180: 1172: 1163: 1161: 1153: 1152: 1140: 1139: 1136: 1135: 1133: 1132: 1123: 1120: 1119: 1109: 1108: 1105: 1104: 1101: 1100: 1098: 1097: 1089: 1081: 1072: 1070: 1066: 1065: 1063: 1062: 1054: 1046: 1037: 1035: 1029: 1028: 1026: 1025: 1017: 1009: 1001: 993: 985: 977: 969: 965:Maxwell v. Dow 960: 958: 954: 953: 951: 950: 942: 934: 926: 918: 910: 902: 894: 886: 878: 870: 862: 854: 846: 838: 830: 822: 813: 811: 807: 806: 804: 803: 795: 787: 779: 771: 763: 755: 751:Adams v. Texas 747: 739: 731: 723: 715: 707: 699: 690: 688: 684: 683: 681: 680: 672: 664: 655: 653: 645: 644: 634: 633: 630: 629: 627: 626: 618: 609: 606: 605: 592: 591: 588: 587: 585: 584: 576: 568: 560: 551: 548: 547: 535: 534: 526: 525: 518: 511: 503: 497: 496: 443: 442:External links 440: 437: 436: 422: 413: 404: 395: 368: 367: 365: 362: 340: 337: 328: 325: 323: 320: 271: 268: 252:sexual assault 243: 240: 207: 206: 200: 199: 195: 194: 188: 184: 183: 179: 178: 177: 176: 166:Stephen Breyer 138:Antonin Scalia 127: 124: 119: 113: 112: 108: 107: 98: 97: 93: 92: 88:A.L.R. Fed. 2d 77: 61: 57: 56: 51: 50:Full case name 47: 46: 40: 39: 34: 26: 25: 17: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1881: 1870: 1867: 1865: 1862: 1860: 1857: 1855: 1852: 1851: 1849: 1825: 1824: 1820: 1817: 1816: 1812: 1809: 1808: 1804: 1801: 1800: 1796: 1793: 1792: 1788: 1787: 1785: 1782: 1778: 1771: 1770: 1766: 1763: 1762: 1758: 1757: 1755: 1751: 1744: 1743: 1739: 1736: 1735: 1734:Buck v. Davis 1731: 1728: 1727: 1723: 1720: 1719: 1715: 1712: 1711: 1707: 1704: 1703: 1699: 1696: 1695: 1691: 1688: 1687: 1683: 1680: 1679: 1675: 1672: 1671: 1667: 1664: 1663: 1659: 1656: 1655: 1651: 1648: 1647: 1643: 1640: 1639: 1635: 1632: 1631: 1627: 1624: 1623: 1619: 1616: 1615: 1611: 1608: 1607: 1603: 1600: 1599: 1595: 1592: 1591: 1587: 1586: 1584: 1582: 1578: 1571: 1570: 1566: 1565: 1563: 1561:Conflict-free 1559: 1552: 1551: 1547: 1544: 1543: 1539: 1536: 1535: 1531: 1528: 1527: 1523: 1520: 1519: 1515: 1512: 1511: 1507: 1504: 1503: 1499: 1496: 1495: 1491: 1488: 1487: 1483: 1480: 1479: 1475: 1472: 1471: 1467: 1464: 1463: 1459: 1458: 1456: 1452: 1445: 1444: 1440: 1439: 1437: 1433: 1429: 1425: 1420: 1416: 1405: 1404: 1400: 1397: 1396: 1392: 1389: 1388: 1384: 1383: 1380: 1376: 1371: 1367: 1352: 1351: 1347: 1346: 1344: 1340: 1333: 1332: 1328: 1327: 1325: 1321: 1314: 1313: 1309: 1306: 1305: 1301: 1298: 1297: 1293: 1290: 1289: 1288:Ohio v. Clark 1285: 1282: 1281: 1277: 1274: 1273: 1269: 1266: 1265: 1261: 1258: 1257: 1253: 1250: 1249: 1245: 1242: 1241: 1237: 1234: 1233: 1229: 1226: 1225: 1221: 1218: 1217: 1213: 1210: 1209: 1205: 1202: 1201: 1197: 1194: 1193: 1189: 1186: 1185: 1181: 1178: 1177: 1173: 1170: 1169: 1165: 1164: 1162: 1158: 1154: 1150: 1145: 1141: 1130: 1129: 1125: 1124: 1121: 1114: 1110: 1095: 1094: 1090: 1087: 1086: 1082: 1079: 1078: 1074: 1073: 1071: 1067: 1060: 1059: 1055: 1052: 1051: 1047: 1044: 1043: 1039: 1038: 1036: 1034: 1030: 1023: 1022: 1018: 1015: 1014: 1010: 1007: 1006: 1002: 999: 998: 994: 991: 990: 986: 983: 982: 978: 975: 974: 970: 967: 966: 962: 961: 959: 955: 948: 947: 943: 940: 939: 935: 932: 931: 927: 924: 923: 919: 916: 915: 911: 908: 907: 906:Oregon v. Ice 903: 900: 899: 895: 892: 891: 887: 884: 883: 879: 876: 875: 871: 868: 867: 863: 860: 859: 855: 852: 851: 847: 844: 843: 839: 836: 835: 831: 828: 827: 823: 820: 819: 815: 814: 812: 808: 801: 800: 796: 793: 792: 788: 785: 784: 780: 777: 776: 772: 769: 768: 764: 761: 760: 756: 753: 752: 748: 745: 744: 740: 737: 736: 732: 729: 728: 724: 721: 720: 716: 713: 712: 711:Irvin v. Dowd 708: 705: 704: 700: 697: 696: 692: 691: 689: 685: 678: 677: 673: 670: 669: 665: 662: 661: 657: 656: 654: 650: 646: 639: 635: 624: 623: 619: 616: 615: 611: 610: 607: 602: 597: 593: 582: 581: 577: 574: 573: 569: 566: 565: 561: 558: 557: 553: 552: 549: 545: 540: 536: 531: 524: 519: 517: 512: 510: 505: 504: 501: 492: 483: 474: 465: 458: 454: 450: 446: 445: 431: 429: 427: 417: 408: 399: 384: 380: 373: 369: 361: 358: 353: 350: 346: 336: 334: 319: 317: 316: 311: 307: 306:cross-examine 303: 301: 296: 292: 288: 287:habeas corpus 283: 281: 277: 267: 263: 259: 257: 253: 249: 239: 237: 233: 229: 228: 223: 219: 215: 214: 205: 201: 196: 193: 189: 185: 180: 175: 171: 167: 163: 159: 155: 151: 147: 143: 139: 135: 131: 128: 125: 123: 120: 118:Chief Justice 117: 116: 114: 109: 105: 104: 99: 94: 89: 85: 81: 75: 74: 69: 66: 62: 58: 55: 52: 48: 41: 37: 27: 22: 16: 1821: 1813: 1805: 1797: 1789: 1767: 1759: 1740: 1732: 1724: 1716: 1708: 1700: 1692: 1684: 1676: 1668: 1660: 1652: 1644: 1638:Bell v. Cone 1636: 1628: 1620: 1612: 1604: 1596: 1588: 1567: 1548: 1540: 1532: 1524: 1516: 1508: 1500: 1492: 1484: 1476: 1468: 1460: 1441: 1401: 1393: 1385: 1348: 1329: 1310: 1302: 1294: 1286: 1278: 1270: 1262: 1254: 1246: 1239: 1238: 1230: 1222: 1214: 1206: 1198: 1190: 1182: 1174: 1166: 1126: 1091: 1083: 1075: 1056: 1053:(1905, 1906) 1048: 1040: 1019: 1011: 1003: 995: 987: 979: 971: 963: 944: 936: 928: 920: 912: 904: 896: 888: 880: 872: 864: 856: 848: 840: 832: 824: 816: 797: 789: 781: 773: 765: 757: 749: 741: 733: 725: 717: 709: 701: 693: 687:Impartiality 674: 666: 658: 652:Availability 620: 614:In re Oliver 612: 601:Public Trial 578: 570: 562: 554: 448: 416: 407: 398: 386:. Retrieved 382: 372: 356: 354: 348: 345:Samuel Alito 342: 332: 330: 313: 309: 298: 284: 273: 264: 260: 245: 235: 232:Samuel Alito 225: 224:and whether 212: 211: 210: 198:Laws applied 191: 182:Case opinion 174:Samuel Alito 169: 157: 150:David Souter 145: 133: 122:John Roberts 101: 71: 53: 15: 1454:Appointment 810:Facts found 388:October 24, 1848:Categories 315:certiorari 256:grand jury 242:Background 84:U.S. LEXIS 289:with the 192:unanimous 80:L. Ed. 2d 60:Citations 532:case law 447:Text of 357:Crawford 349:Crawford 343:Justice 333:Crawford 322:Decision 310:Crawford 236:Crawford 187:Majority 82:1; 2007 464:Cornell 96:Holding 1826:(2008) 1818:(2000) 1810:(1987) 1802:(1984) 1794:(1975) 1781:Pro se 1772:(1977) 1764:(1963) 1745:(2019) 1737:(2017) 1729:(2012) 1721:(2011) 1713:(2010) 1705:(2010) 1697:(2009) 1689:(2009) 1681:(2009) 1673:(2008) 1665:(2004) 1657:(2003) 1649:(2002) 1641:(2002) 1633:(2001) 1625:(2000) 1617:(1993) 1609:(1986) 1601:(1986) 1593:(1984) 1572:(1942) 1553:(2002) 1545:(1994) 1537:(1987) 1529:(1979) 1521:(1973) 1513:(1972) 1505:(1967) 1497:(1963) 1489:(1961) 1481:(1942) 1473:(1938) 1465:(1932) 1446:(2006) 1435:Choice 1406:(1988) 1398:(1982) 1390:(1967) 1353:(1973) 1334:(1990) 1315:(2024) 1307:(2023) 1299:(2022) 1291:(2015) 1283:(2012) 1275:(2011) 1267:(2011) 1259:(2009) 1251:(2008) 1243:(2007) 1235:(2006) 1227:(2004) 1219:(1980) 1211:(1970) 1203:(1969) 1195:(1968) 1187:(1965) 1179:(1911) 1171:(1878) 1131:(1972) 1096:(2017) 1088:(2014) 1080:(1987) 1061:(2023) 1045:(1853) 1024:(2021) 1016:(2020) 1008:(1979) 1000:(1978) 992:(1972) 984:(1970) 976:(1905) 968:(1900) 949:(2024) 941:(2019) 933:(2016) 925:(2013) 917:(2012) 909:(2009) 901:(2007) 893:(2006) 885:(2005) 877:(2004) 869:(2004) 861:(2002) 853:(2002) 845:(2000) 837:(1999) 829:(1998) 821:(1990) 802:(2022) 794:(2016) 786:(2010) 778:(1992) 770:(1985) 762:(1981) 754:(1980) 746:(1976) 738:(1973) 730:(1968) 722:(1966) 714:(1961) 706:(1942) 698:(1878) 679:(1989) 671:(1968) 663:(1966) 625:(2010) 617:(1948) 603:Clause 583:(2016) 575:(1992) 567:(1972) 559:(1967) 494:  488:  485:  479:  476:  473:Justia 470:  467:  461:  172: 170:· 168:  160: 158:· 156:  148: 146:· 144:  136: 134:· 132:  455: 364:Notes 327:Issue 457:U.S. 390:2007 73:more 65:U.S. 63:549 453:549 68:406 1850:: 451:, 425:^ 381:. 318:. 522:e 515:t 508:v 392:. 302:, 76:) 70:(

Index

Supreme Court of the United States
U.S.
406
more
L. Ed. 2d
U.S. LEXIS
A.L.R. Fed. 2d
Crawford v. Washington
John Roberts
John P. Stevens
Antonin Scalia
Anthony Kennedy
David Souter
Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito
U.S. Const. amend. VI
United States Supreme Court
Confrontation Clause
Crawford v. Washington
Samuel Alito
Las Vegas, Nevada
sexual assault
grand jury
Nevada Supreme Court
Sixth Amendment
habeas corpus
United States District Court for the District of Nevada
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.