Supreme Court Watch: Twelve Cases Seeking Review Of Confrontation Clause and Expert Testimony Issues

  • strict warning: Declaration of flag_handler_relationship_content::ui_name() should be compatible with views_handler::ui_name($short = false) in /home/evidentl/public_html/sites/all/modules/flag/includes/flag_handler_relationships.inc on line 171.
  • strict warning: Declaration of flag_handler_relationship_counts::ui_name() should be compatible with views_handler::ui_name($short = false) in /home/evidentl/public_html/sites/all/modules/flag/includes/flag_handler_relationships.inc on line 226.

Pending before the Supreme Court are at least one dozen cases that seek to clarify the application of the Confrontation Clause to expert testimony involving the statements of non-testifying witnesses; while it remains to be seen whether the Court will grant review on one or more of these cases in the near term, a strong need remains for guidance following the confusion sown by plurality decision in Williams v. Illinois, 567 U.S. _, 132 S.Ct. 2221, 183 L.Ed.2d 89 (June 18, 2012) (No. 10-8505)

At the beginning of the year, the Federal Evidence Blog noted the need for the Supreme Court to resolve a significant Confrontation Clause issue which has led to confusion among the lower courts in considering expert testimony which is based upon the statements of non-testifying witnesses. The uncertainty follows from the plurality decision in Williams v. Illinois, 567 U.S. _, 132 S.Ct. 2221, 183 L.Ed.2d 89 (June 18, 2012) (No. 10-8505). The lower courts have been unable to discern a majority opinion from the Supreme Court on this issue. See Supreme Court Watch: Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause): Continuing Confusion On Expert Testimony Following Williams v. Illinois.

Pending Cases Seeking Certiorari Review

Presently, there are about a dozen cases pending for certiorari review before the Supreme Court. As noted below, several of these cases are pending for Conference review by the Court on May 22, 2014 or June 5, 2014. A number of these cases have been relisted, or continued, from prior Conferences. Where possible, the petitions for certiorari review is included:

Other Recent Blog Posts

For other recent posts in the Federal Evidence Blog touching on this developing constitutional issue, consider:

The Federal Evidence Blog will continue to monitor this issue. In the meantime, for more information on the Williams case (including copies of the briefs in the case and other related materials), see the Williams v. Illinois Resource Page, which includes Key Briefs and Other Materials, and coverage in the Federal Evidence Blog.

______________________________

Subscribe Now To The Federal Evidence Review

** Less Than $25 Per Month ** Limited Time Offer **

subscribe today button

Federal Rules of Evidence
PDF