State v. Clark
Ohio Supreme Court
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
- 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
- Melendez-Diaz v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Michigan v. BryantSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Ohio v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
- State v. CarterOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
- Pueblo v. Pérez SantosSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 2016
- State v. StrauchNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2015
- State Of Washington v. Wallace RobinsonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.