A Comment on the Supreme Court's Decision in Ohio v. Clark: The Court's Confrontation Clause Jurisprudence Evolves
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
6-19-2015
Abstract
In Ohio v. Clark, the U.S. Supreme Court held admissible in defendant’s criminal trial for child abuse, a teacher’s testimony that the three-year-old victim, upon being pressed for an answer, told his pre-school teacher that the defendant was responsible for the physical abuse noted by the teachers on the child. This on-the-stand report of the child’s out-of-court statement, was admissible even though the child did not take the witness stand for possible cross examination and jury scrutiny of his demeanor to gauge his accuracy.
Publication Citation
CASETEXT (June 19, 2015) https://casetext.com/posts/a-comment-on-the-supreme-courts-decision-in-ohio-v-clark [https://perma.cc/9SF8-K66R?type=image]
Scholarly Commons Citation
Rothstein, Paul F., "A Comment on the Supreme Court's Decision in Ohio v. Clark: The Court's Confrontation Clause Jurisprudence Evolves" (2015). Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works. 1583.
https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/1583