Legal Opinion
White v. Illinois
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided January 15, 1992No. 90-6113PublishedCited by 1,106 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Rehnquist
In this case, we consider whether the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment requires that, before a trial court admits testimony under the “spontaneous declaration” and “medical examination” exceptions to the hearsay rule, *349the prosecution must either produce the declarant at trial or the trial court must find that the declarant is unavailable. The Illinois Appellate Court concluded that such procedures are not constitutionally required. We agree with that conclusion.
Petitioner was convicted by a jury of aggravated criminal sexual assault, residential burglary, and unlawful restraint.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- California v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Bourjaily v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Dutton v. EvansSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Idaho v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1,106 opinions
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Davis v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Melendez-Diaz v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Lilly v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Williamson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
1,101 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.