Legal Opinion

Vega v. State

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided August 12, 2010No. 53752PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By the Court,

Hardesty, J.:

In this opinion, we address three issues on appeal.

First, we consider whether appellant Bernardo Vega’s constitutional right to confrontation under the Confrontation Clause, Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004), and Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 305 (2009), was violated. We conclude that Vega’s constitutional right to confrontation was violated when the district court erroneously admitted the testimonial statements from an unavailable expert witness without the witness previously being subjected to cross-examination. However, we conclude that…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Davis v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
  3. Melendez-Diaz v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  4. Harris v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  5. Chavez v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2009

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Jeremias v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2018
  2. Nunnery v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2011
  3. BOSSE v. STATECourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 2017
  4. Dieudonne v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2011
  5. Commonwealth v. MunozMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2011

33 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