The Prosecution’s Choice: Admitting a Non-testifying Domestic Violence Victim’s Statements Under Crawford v. Washington

Authors

Kristine Soulé

Publication Date

3-1-2006

Document Type

Comment

Abstract

This Comment explores these available options in light of Crawford's holding and reasoning. In Part II this Comment provides an overview of the background of the Confrontation Clause from its development as a constitutional amendment through its application in Ohio v. Roberts and the admissibility of hearsay. Part III examines Crawford and its holding. Part IV discusses the policy concerns leading to the use of police reports and officer testimony in the prosecution of domestic violence cases and the problems that arise in the prosecution of domestic violence cases. Part V examines excited utterance in Texas, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals's recent opinion defining "testimonial," and how Texas courts may apply this definition in domestic violence cases. Finally, Part VI discusses the applicability of the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing doctrine.

DOI

10.37419/TWLR.V12.I2.9

First Page

689

Last Page

710

Recommended Citation

Kristine Soulé, The Prosecution’s Choice: Admitting a Non-testifying Domestic Violence Victim’s Statements Under Crawford v. Washington, 12 Tex. Wesleyan L. Rev. 689 (2006).
Available at: https://doi.org/10.37419/TWLR.V12.I2.9