CrimProf Blog

Fenner on Today's Confrontation Clause

G. Michael Fenner  (Creighton University School of Law) has posted Today's Confrontation Clause (After Crawford and Melendez-Diaz) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

In the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the Confrontation Clause states that, “[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him.” In recent years the Supreme Court of the United States’s understanding of the meaning of this Clause may well be the single part of constitutional law - certainly of criminal procedure - that has undergone the most radical change.

This Article is about this sharp turn in the law of the Confrontation Clause. After a brief discussion of the history of the Court’s understanding of the Clause, the Article settles into a discussion of its new understanding, as found primarily in the Court’s opinion in 2004’s Crawford v. Washington and its 2009 opinion in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts - a discussion of where the Court’s understanding sits today and where it may be headed. Throughout, the Article deals with the details of the coverage of the Confrontation Clause - when the right attaches and what the Clause requires when the right does attach.

It begins with a brief history of the Court’s treatment of the Confrontation Clause. It continues with a discussion of the following: Justice Thomas’s understanding of the Clause, important because it supplies the fifth vote for the majority’s new understanding; the elements foundational to the attachment of the confrontation right (testimonial statements, offered in a criminal prosecution, offered against the accused, and offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted; the importance of raising Confrontation Clause issues before the start of the trial; situations where the right attaches and might at first glance appear to be infringed, but on a closer look is not; inefficiencies created by the right to confront, how the inefficiencies are not as great as they may at first glance seem, and how, in any event, whether the right is inefficient or not is largely irrelevant; various ways to handle the traumatized victim who will be further traumatized if made to testify against the accused; forfeiture and waiver of the right to confront; and the harmless error rule as it applies to the confrontation right.

Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads

are here. The usual disclaimers apply.

Rank	Downloads	Paper Title
1	296	The Emerging Criminal War on Sex Offenders Corey Rayburn Yung, The John Marshall Law School, Date posted to database: August 18, 2009
2	276	The Increased Level of EU Antitrust Fines, Judicial Review, and the European Convention on Human Rights Wouter P. J. Wils, European Commission Legal Service, Date posted to database: October 24, 2009 [4th last week]
3	271	Blaming the Brain Steven K. Erickson, University of Missouri at Columbia - School of Law, Date posted to database: September 12, 2009 [2nd last week]
4	248	The Torture Lawyers Jens David Ohlin, Cornell Law School, Date posted to database: September 10, 2009 [3rd last week]
5	190	Can Bad Science Be Good Evidence: Lie Detection, Neuroscience, and the Mistaken Conflation of Legal and Scientific Norms Frederick Schauer, University of Virginia School of Law, Date posted to database: August 13, 2009
6	152	The Experiential Future of the Law Adam J. Kolber, University of San Diego School of Law, Date posted to database: October 13, 2009 [7th last week]
7	149	Incarceration American-Style Sharon Dolovich, University of California, Los Angeles - School of Law, Date posted to database: October 13, 2009 [8th last week]
8	117	Henry Louis Gates and Racial Profiling: What's the Problem? Bernard E. Harcourt, University of Chicago - Law School, Date posted to database: September 21, 2009 [new to top ten]
9	117	The Crime of Conviction of John Choon Yoo: The Actual Criminality in the OLC During the Bush Administration Joseph Lavitt, University of California, Berkeley - School of Law, Date posted to database: September 23, 2009 [new to top ten]
10	115	Unlawful Killing with Combat Drones: A Case Study of Pakistan, 2004-2009 Mary Ellen O'Connell, Notre Dame Law School , Date posted to database: November 6, 2009 [new to top ten]