This blog is devoted to reporting and commenting on developments related to Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004). Crawford transformed the doctrine of the Confrontation Clause, but it left many open questions that are, and will continue to be, the subject of a great deal of litigation and academic commentary.
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Williams reply brief
Sorry, I've been slow in posting the reply brief in Williams v. Illinois, but here it is.
Happy Thanksgiving to all!
1 comment:
Anonymous
said...
Did the defense ever lodge a timely, specific objection to the prosecutor's singular question (on page 1 of the reply brief) that Williams claims elicited testimonial hearsay from Lambatos?
If not, didn't the defense waived any confrontation clause issue with respect to this evidence?
1 comment:
Did the defense ever lodge a timely, specific objection to the prosecutor's singular question (on page 1 of the reply brief) that Williams claims elicited testimonial hearsay from Lambatos?
If not, didn't the defense waived any confrontation clause issue with respect to this evidence?
Post a Comment