SANSON
v.
UNITED STATES

U.S. | 1984-06-25
No. 83-6454
467 U.S. 1264 Supreme Court of the United States (1984) Positive Treatment
Cited by 32 cases
Dissent
Justice White,

[*1265] Justice White,

dissenting.

In Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U. S. 56 (1980), the Court held that th( introduction of hearsay statements against a criminal defendanl will not violate the Confrontation Clause if two requirements arc satisfied. First, the prosecution must ordinarily demonstrate the unavailability of the declarant; second, the statements must beai sufficient “indicia of reliability.” Id., at 65-66. The Court noted that “[r]eliability can be inferred without more in a case where the evidence falls within a firmly rooted hearsay exception.” Id., at 66. The question presented in this case is whether statements that satisfy Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(E), which provides for the admissibility of statements of co-conspirators, necessarily satisfy the requirements of the Confrontation Clause.

The Circuits are divided on the question whether co-conspirator statements fall within the “firmly rooted hearsay exception” language of Roberts or whether, instead, a case-by-case inquiry into reliability is required. In this case, the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in an unpublished order held that Rule 801(d)(2)(E) provides adequate assurances of reliability. Likewise, the First, Fourth, and Fifth Circuits have also held that the Rule 801(d)(2)(E) requirements are identical to the requirements of the Confrontation Clause. See Ottomano v. United States, 468 F. 2d 269, 273 (CA1 1972), cert. denied, 409 U. S. 1128 (1973); United States v. Lurz, 666 F. 2d 69, 80-81 (CA4 1981), cert. denied, 455 U. S. 1005 (1982); United States v. Peacock, 654 F. 2d 339, 349-350 (CA5 1981), cert. denied, 464 U. S. 965 (1983).

On the other hand, the Second, Third, Eighth, and Ninth Circuits have held that the requirements are not identical and that courts must assess the circumstances of each case to determine whether the statements carry with them sufficient indicia of reliability. See United States v. Wright, 588 F. 2d 31, 37-38 (CA2 1978), cert. denied, 440 U. S. 917 (1979); United States v. Ammar, 714 F. 2d 238, 254-257 (CA3), cert. denied sub nom. Stillman v. United States, 464 U. S. 936 (1983); United States v. Kelley, 526 F. 2d 615, 620-621 (CA8 1975), cert. denied, 424 U. S. 971 (1976); United States v. Perez, 658 F. 2d 654, 660, and n. 5 (CA9 1981).

Because of the substantial confusion surrounding this frequently recurring issue, I would grant certiorari to resolve the conflict.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By (32 total)

  • Rogers v. State, 511 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 1987)
    …st contends that the failure to provide written instructions for the jury to take into their deliberations was reversible error. This issue already has been resolved adversely to appellant in Delap v. State, 440 So. 2d 1242 (Fla.1983), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1264, 104 S.Ct. 3559, 82 L.Ed.2d 860 (1984). Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.400 gives the trial court discretion to provide or not to provide written instructions. We recognize the efficacy of assisting the jury in understanding its task, and, alth…
  • Hansbrough v. State, 509 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. 1987)
    …e had reviewed the results of a polygraph examination conducted on Hansbrough. Defense counsel moved for a mistrial, which the trial court denied. Although polygraph evidence is inadmissible, Delay v. State, 440 So. 2d 1242 (Fla.1983), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1264, 104 S.Ct. 3569, 82 L.Ed.2d 860 (1984), the mere mention of a polygraph examination is not necessarily reversible error. Davis v. State, 461 So. 2d 67 (Fla.1984), cert. denied, 473 U.S. 913, 105 S.Ct. 3540, 87 L.Ed.2d 663 (1985); Sullivan v. State,…
  • Haliburton v. State, 561 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 1990)
    …was under sentence of imprisonment and thus subject to the aggravating factor provided by section 921.141(5)(a) is supported by evidence that he was on parole at the time he committed murder. Delap v. State, 440 So. 2d 1242 (Fla.1983), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1264, 104 S.Ct. 3559, 82 L.Ed.2d 860 (1984); Jones v. State, 411 So. 2d 165 (Fla.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 891, 103 S.Ct. 189, 74 L.Ed.2d 153 (1982); Straight v. State, 397 So. 2d 903 (Fla.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1022, 102 S.Ct. 556, 70 L.Ed.2d 418 (19…

Previewing 3 of 32 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited (19 total)

View all 19 cited authorities →

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw