Legal Opinion
State v. Hallum
Supreme Court of Iowa
Decided October 21, 1998No. 97-370PublishedCited by 67 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TERNUS, Justice.
Defendant, Matthew Hallum, appeals his criminal convictions claiming the trial court’s admission of the videotaped, narrative statement of Hallum’s accomplice violated the ban on hearsay evidence and Hallum’s rights under the Confrontation Clause. See U.S. Const, amend. VI; Iowa R. Evid. 802. Hal-lum also alleges ineffective assistance of trial counsel based on his attorney’s stipulation to the admission of certain assertions contained in the narrative statement. Finding no reversible error, we affirm.
I. Factual Background.
In the early morning hours of February 26,1993,…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Delaware v. Van ArsdallSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Idaho v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- White v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Lee v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by67 opinions
- State v. RobertsWashington Supreme Court · 2000
- Harrington v. StateSupreme Court of Iowa · 2003
- State Of Iowa Vs. Robert L. HanesSupreme Court of Iowa · 2010
- State v. SchiappaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
- State v. PierreSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
62 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.