Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Vann v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 11, 1992No. CR 91-191Published

1ConcurrenceTom Glaze, Justice

This court’s plurality decision in George v. State, 306 Ark. 360, 813 S.W.2d 792 (1991) (George I), which was supplemented by opinion in George v. State, 307 Ark. 374-A, 818 S.W.2d 951 (1991) (George II), was our first occasion to consider the recent case of Idaho v. Wright, — U.S--, 110 S.Ct. 3139 (1990). In George I, the majority court held that, under Wright, our A.R.E. Rule 803(25) ran afoul of the Confrontation Clause. The majority opinion said that the utilization of the factors listed in Rule 803(25) was impermissible in a trial court’s determination of the trustworthiness and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Idaho v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  2. State v. SypultSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1990
  3. George v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1991
  4. Ragland v. Pittman Garden Center, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API