Commonwealth v. Walter
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Justice TODD.
In this appeal by the Commonwealth, we consider whether the Superior Court erred in holding the trial court was required to determine that the child victim was competent to testify under Pa.R.E. 601 prior to admitting her out-of-court statements into evidence pursuant to the Tender Years Hearsay Act (“TYHA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. *445§ 5985.1. We hold that a determination of a child’s competency pursuant to Rule 601 is not a prerequisite to the admission of hearsay statements under the TYHA, and, therefore, we reverse the decision of the Superior Court and remand for further…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Idaho v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Rosche v. McCoySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
- Commonwealth v. AllshouseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Com. v. Fitzpatrick, J., IIISuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
- Com. v. Schultz, Jr., P.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
- In Re D.M.WSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Commonwealth v. DawsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
- In the Interest of: N.C., Appeal of: CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.