State v. Bentley
Supreme Court of Iowa
1Opinion of the Court
HECHT, Justice.
The issue presented in this interlocutory appeal is whether the videotaped statements of J.G., a ten-year-old child, are admissible under the Confrontation Clause of the United States Constitution at James Bentley’s trial on sexual abuse charges. Because we conclude J.G.’s statements are testimonial, J.G. is unavailable to testify at trial, and Bentley had no opportunity for cross-examination, we affirm the district court’s ruling that the videotaped statements are inadmissible under the Confrontation Clause.
I.Factual Background.
On November 16, 2004, J.G. was interviewed by…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Davis v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Idaho v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Maryland v. CraigSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- State v. ArnoldOhio Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. BasilSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2010
- State v. SchaerSupreme Court of Iowa · 2008
- State v. KoslowskiWashington Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. KoslowskiWashington Supreme Court · 2009
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.