Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

O confrontation clause issue the confrontation clause

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: t of his injury, Foster's memory was severely impaired. When first interviewed, Foster was lethargic and couldn't remember his attacker's name. A few weeks later Foster named respondent as his attacker and identified respondent from an array of photographs. At trial, Foster recounted his activities just before the attack and testified that he remembered identifying respondent as his attacker during his second interview. Foster admitted that he could not remember whether any of his hospital visitors suggested that respondent was the assailant. Procedural Posture: Respondent was convicted and sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment. On appeal, US court of Appeals considered challenges based on the Confrontation Clause and Rule 802 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Upheld both challenges and reversed the judgment of the District Court. Appellant now claims that the confrontation clause requires that the witness have present recollection of the identity of the person. Similarly, appellant argues that Foster's ident...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 08/28/2008 for the course N 483 taught by Professor Wellborn during the Summer '08 term at University of Texas at Austin.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online