Legal Opinion

State v. Abd-Rahmaan

Washington Supreme Court

Decided May 12, 2005No. 75398-9PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶1 This case involves the issue of the admissibility of hearsay statements of unavailable witnesses in a sentencing modification hearing. Petitioner Khatib Abd-Rahmaan argues that the United States Supreme Court ruling in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 124 S. Ct. 1354, 158 L. Ed. 2d 177 (2004), applies here and requires the exclusion of hearsay evidence because Abd-Rahmaan did not have a prior opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses. In the alternative, Abd-Rahmaan argues the trial court erred in admitting hearsay evidence without making specific findings of good cause. We hold that…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. North Carolina v. AlfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Gagnon v. ScarpelliSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. State v. StoutWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  2. In Re Detention of StoutWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  3. State v. McCormickWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  4. State v. McCormickWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  5. State v. Abd-RahmaanWashington Supreme Court · 2005

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

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

Powered by the Exa API