State v. Rose
Idaho Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
JONES, W., Justice.
Joshua Rose appeals from the district court’s order revoking probation. Rose claims he was denied an opportunity to confront adverse witnesses because the district court admitted hearsay at the evidentiary hearing on whether he violated the terms of his probation. The Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding that the Sixth Amendment right of confrontation as set forth in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 124 S.Ct. 1354, 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004) does not apply to probation revocation proceedings, and that the lesser confrontation right afforded as a matter of due process under…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Gagnon v. ScarpelliSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United States v. Mary A. KirbyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- State v. Le VequeIdaho Supreme Court · 2018
- Robert Smith v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2012
- State v. WalkerCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 2009
- State v. EsquilinConnecticut Appellate Court · 2018
- State v. MarquisSupreme Court of Kansas · 2011
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.