This blog is devoted to reporting and commenting on developments related to Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004). Crawford transformed the doctrine of the Confrontation Clause, but it left many open questions that are, and will continue to be, the subject of a great deal of litigation and academic commentary.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Supreme Court decides that states may apply Crawford retroactively
Last year, in Whorton v. Bockting, the Supreme Court decided that Crawford does not apply retroactively as a matter of federal constitutional law. Yesterday, in Danforth v. Minnesota, 2008 WL 441059, the Court held that states are free to apply broader rules of retroactivity than the constitutionally mandated ones, and so may apply Crawford retroactively. I hope to comment soon on this decision and on Whorton, too. I don't think Danforth will have a major impact. At least in most circumstances in which a state court would be tempted to apply Crawford retroactively, it could reach the same result by giving retroactive application to confrontation rights under the state constitution.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment