State v. Tribble
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.
¶ 1. The main issue in this case is whether the trial court’s admission of a videotaped deposition of a key State witness who was out of the country but willing to travel to the trial violated defendant’s constitutional right to confrontation where defendant personally objected to admission of the testimony on the record, but his counsel stipulated to the videotape’s admission. We conclude that defendant’s rights were violated by the admission of the hearsay testimony and, accordingly, reverse. Because the issue is very likely to arise on remand, we also consider defendant’s claim that the…
2Cases cited52 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- State v. Mark BergquistSupreme Court of Vermont · 2019
- State v. Lawrence, Sr.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2013
- In re K.F.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2013
- State v. LeibelNebraska Supreme Court · 2013
- In re Gregory S. FitzGeraldSupreme Court of Vermont · 2020
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.