Legal Opinion

State v. Clark

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 30, 2013No. 2012-0215PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Donnell, J.

{¶ 1} The issue in this case is whether the trial court violated Darius Clark’s constitutional right to confront the witnesses against him when it admitted a hearsay statement that three-and-a-half-year-old L.P. made to his preschool teacher, Debra Jones, in response to questions asked about injuries to his eye and marks on his face observed upon his arrival at a preschool day care.

{¶ 2} In Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813, 822, 126 S.Ct. 2266, 165 L.Ed.2d 224 (2006), the court enunciated the primary-purpose test to determine whether a *347statement made to a law-enforcement officer or an agent…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. Davis v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
  4. Melendez-Diaz v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  5. Michigan v. BryantSupreme Court of the United States · 2011

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Ohio v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
  2. State v. CarterOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
  3. Pueblo v. Pérez SantosSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 2016
  4. State v. StrauchNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2015
  5. State Of Washington v. Wallace RobinsonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API