State v. Eastham
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
The issue presented in this action is whether the procedure employed by the trial court violated appellant’s constitutional right to confront the witnesses against him. We hold that appellant’s right was violated and, accordingly, reverse the judgment of the court of appeals.
Appellant possesses the right to confront the witnesses against him under both the federal and Ohio Constitutions. The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States provides:
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Pointer v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Coy v. IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Jay v. BoydSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
- State v. CoySupreme Court of Iowa · 1986
3Cited by73 opinions
- State v. MaxwellOhio Supreme Court · 2014
- State v. BostonOhio Supreme Court · 1989
- State v. DeverOhio Supreme Court · 1992
- State v. MuttartOhio Supreme Court · 2007
- State v. SelfOhio Supreme Court · 1990
68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.