Giles v. California
2008 United States Supreme Court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Giles v. California?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
SHOW ALL QUESTIONS
Giles v. California, 554 U.S. 353 (2008), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that for testimonial statements to be admissible under the forfeiture exception to hearsay, the defendant must have intended to make the witness unavailable for trial.[1]
Quick Facts Giles v. California, Argued April 22, 2008 Decided June 25, 2008 ...
Giles v. California | |
---|---|
Argued April 22, 2008 Decided June 25, 2008 | |
Full case name | Dwayne Giles v. California |
Docket no. | 07-6053 |
Citations | 554 U.S. 353 (more) 128 S. Ct. 2678; 171 L. Ed. 2d 488 |
Case history | |
Prior | Vacated, 40 Cal.4th 833 (2007) |
Holding | |
For statements to be admitted under the forfeiture exception to the confrontation right, the defendant must have intended to make the witness unavailable for trial. Vacated and remanded. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Scalia, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito; Souter, Ginsburg (all but Part II–D–2) |
Concurrence | Thomas |
Concurrence | Alito |
Concurrence | Souter (in part), joined by Ginsburg |
Dissent | Breyer, joined by Stevens, Kennedy |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. amends. VI, XIV |
Close