The Confrontation Clause: Where things stand after Arizona v. Smith
Impossible d'ajouter des articles
Désolé, nous ne sommes pas en mesure d'ajouter l'article car votre panier est déjà plein.
Veuillez réessayer plus tard
Veuillez réessayer plus tard
Échec de l’élimination de la liste d'envies.
Veuillez réessayer plus tard
Impossible de suivre le podcast
Impossible de ne plus suivre le podcast
The Confrontation Clause: Where things stand after Arizona v. Smith
-
Lu par :
-
De :
The Confrontation clause of the U.S. Constitution gives criminal defendants the right “to be confronted with the witnesses against him”. The interpretation of this right at the U.S. Supreme Court has changed significantly over the past 20 years beginning with Crawford v. Washington. This term, the Supreme Court once again addressed this issue in a case coming from our very own Arizona courts.
This episode reviews several of the cases that brought us to Smith v. Arizona, what the decision means for current criminal practitioners, and tries to predict where we go from here. Conversations like this one are necessary as we decide what the fallout from this decision will be in ongoing cases.
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_c
Aucun commentaire pour le moment