Legal Opinion

United States v. Taylor

District Court, E.D. Tennessee

Decided September 5, 2008No. 1:04-cr-00160PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

CURTIS L. COLLIER, Chief Judge.

In Defendant Rejón Taylor’s ongoing capital trial, the United States seeks to introduce a hearsay statement. Defendant opposes the statement’s admission on the grounds that it violates the Confrontation Clause of the United States Constitution. Because the Court concludes the statement is testimonial and the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing rule, as announced in Giles v. California, — U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 2678, 171 L.Ed.2d 488 (2008), is not satisfied, the Court rules the statement inadmissible.

I. RELEVANT FACTS

A. The Indictment

A Superseding Indictment…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Davis v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
  3. Giles v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
  4. United States v. Sean Lamont CromerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
  5. United States v. Walter Meade Pugh, Jr. (03-3241) and Tyreese Pugh (03-3243)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Parker v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 2009
  2. United States v. LedbetterDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2015
  3. Parker v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API