Michigan v. Bryant
|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
Oct 5, 2010
|Feb 28, 2011||6-2||Sotomayor||OT 2010|
Holding: A statement given to police by a wounded crime victim identifying the person who shot him may be admitted as evidence at the trial if the victim dies before trial and thus does not appear. Because the primary purpose of the interrogation was to enable police to deal with an ongoing emergency, the statements resulting from that interrogation were not testimonial and could be admitted without violating the Confrontation Clause. (Kagan, J., recused).
Plain English Holding: A statement given to police by a wounded crime victim identifying the person who shot him is nontestimonial, and thus may be admitted as evidence at the trial without violating the Confrontation Clause even though the victim has died and thus cannot appear, because the primary purpose of the interrogation was to enable police to deal with an ongoing emergency. (Kagan, J., recused).
Judgment: Vacated and Remanded, 6-2, in an opinion by Justice Sonia Sotomayor on February 28, 2011. Justice Scalia and Justice Ginsburg each filed separate dissents. Justice Kagan did not take part in the decision.
- Opinion recap: Court expands a hearsay exception (Erin Miller)
- Last week's opinions in Plain English (Lisa McElroy)
- Argument recap: Court struggles to define "non-testimonial" statements (Erin Miller)
- Argument preview: The Court considers the Confrontation Clause again (Erin Miller)
Briefs and Documents
- Brief for Petitioner the People of the State of Michigan
- Brief for Respondent Richard Perry Bryant
- Reply Brief for Petitioner the People of the State of Michigan
- Brief for States of Maryland, Utah, Vermont, Hawaii, Nevada, Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Mississippi, Arizona, Oklahoma, Maine, New Mexico, Louisiana, Alaska, Massachusetts, Wyoming, Wisconsin, South Dakota, Texas, Minnesota, Washington, Idaho, Virginia , Colorado, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio Connecticut, Kansas, Nebraska, Montana, Indiana, South Carolina, New Hampshire, and Florida in Spport of Petitioner
- Brief for the United States of America in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for Richard D. Friedman in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Respondent