Vann v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Robert H. Dudley, Justice.
We hold that A.R.E. Rule 803(25), the “statute” of evidence enacted by the General Assembly, violates the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. We make no holding as to its validity in civil cases. The facts in the case are as follows. The appellant was charged with the rape of his three-year-old niece. As provided in A.R.E. Rule 803(25), the State moved for a pre-trial hearing to prove the “reasonable likelihood of trustworthiness” of the three-year-old child’s out-of-court statements to her mother, a nurse, and a policeman. The trial court heard the evidence…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Idaho v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Fahy v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- White v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Morgan v. ForetichCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1988
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Jones v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
- Riggs v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
- Martin v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001
- Wilson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1994
- Williams v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.