<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Today&#8217;s Orders &#8211; Four Grants</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/todays-orders-four-grants/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/todays-orders-four-grants/</link>
	<description>The Supreme Court of the United States blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:56:34 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Aslett</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/todays-orders-four-grants/comment-page-1/#comment-14162</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Aslett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 20:24:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/todays-orders-four-grants/#comment-14162</guid>
		<description>The filings in Giles are available here:

http://confrontationright.blogspot.com/2007/12/two-pending-cert-petitions.html

The question presented is:

Does a criminal defendant “forfeit” his or her Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause claims upon a mere showing that the defendant has caused the unavailability of a witness, as some courts have held, or must there also be an additional showing that the defendant&#039;s actions were undertaken for the purpose
of preventing the witness from testifying, as other courts have held?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The filings in Giles are available here:</p>
<p><a href="http://confrontationright.blogspot.com/2007/12/two-pending-cert-petitions.html" rel="nofollow">http://confrontationright.blogspot.com/2007/12/two-pending-cert-petitions.html</a></p>
<p>The question presented is:</p>
<p>Does a criminal defendant “forfeit” his or her Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause claims upon a mere showing that the defendant has caused the unavailability of a witness, as some courts have held, or must there also be an additional showing that the defendant&#8217;s actions were undertaken for the purpose<br />
of preventing the witness from testifying, as other courts have held?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jennifer Bontrager</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/todays-orders-four-grants/comment-page-1/#comment-14160</link>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer Bontrager</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:17:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/todays-orders-four-grants/#comment-14160</guid>
		<description>Does anyone know the question presented in Giles v. California?  I can&#039;t find anything on the SCOTUS website.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does anyone know the question presented in Giles v. California?  I can&#8217;t find anything on the SCOTUS website.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.716 seconds -->
