Comments on: “tender years” exception to hearsay http://apublicdefender.com/2007/03/04/tender-years-exception-to-hearsay/ Fri, 03 Sep 2010 03:24:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: “tender years” and Crawford http://apublicdefender.com/2007/03/04/tender-years-exception-to-hearsay/comment-page-1/#comment-571 “tender years” and Crawford Sat, 21 Apr 2007 23:50:14 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/2007/03/04/tender-years-exception-to-hearsay/#comment-571 [...] of CDW helpfully points out that there is a a big Constitutional roadblock to the tender years exception statutes: Crawford v. [...] [...] of CDW helpfully points out that there is a a big Constitutional roadblock to the tender years exception statutes: Crawford v. [...]

]]> By: Gideon http://apublicdefender.com/2007/03/04/tender-years-exception-to-hearsay/comment-page-1/#comment-555 Gideon Sat, 21 Apr 2007 02:01:14 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/2007/03/04/tender-years-exception-to-hearsay/#comment-555 Yeah, you're absolutely right. Crawford would prohibit the admission of such statements. What's troubling, however, is that legislators are still proposing such bills. I'm assuming that whoever conducts their research would have stumbled across Snowden and disregarded it for some reason. For those interested, I'll create a new post on it, but in the meantime, here's the decision: <a href="http://www.law.umich.edu/library/spotlight/confrontationclause/cases/snowden42a04.pdf">State v. Snowden</a> [pdf] Yeah, you’re absolutely right. Crawford would prohibit the admission of such statements. What’s troubling, however, is that legislators are still proposing such bills. I’m assuming that whoever conducts their research would have stumbled across Snowden and disregarded it for some reason.

For those interested, I’ll create a new post on it, but in the meantime, here’s the decision:

State v. Snowden [pdf]

]]> By: karl http://apublicdefender.com/2007/03/04/tender-years-exception-to-hearsay/comment-page-1/#comment-554 karl Sat, 21 Apr 2007 01:53:12 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/2007/03/04/tender-years-exception-to-hearsay/#comment-554 There is a real big Crawford problem with most of these tender years statutes. A great example is laid out in State (of Maryland) v. Snowden which is arguably the most cited case on point. It holds such evidence is per se excludable post-Crawford as it is (1) testimonial & (2) the Accused was not afforded an opportunity for cross at the time the statement was taken. There is a real big Crawford problem with most of these tender years statutes. A great example is laid out in State (of Maryland) v. Snowden which is arguably the most cited case on point. It holds such evidence is per se excludable post-Crawford as it is (1) testimonial & (2) the Accused was not afforded an opportunity for cross at the time the statement was taken.

]]> By: Steve Smith http://apublicdefender.com/2007/03/04/tender-years-exception-to-hearsay/comment-page-1/#comment-358 Steve Smith Tue, 13 Mar 2007 22:48:04 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/2007/03/04/tender-years-exception-to-hearsay/#comment-358 Maine currently does not allow a "tender years exception in criminal cases under this type of rule. There is a similar rule in child protective proceedings and this rule goes so far as to allow the judge to exclude child witnesses under subpoena by the defense upon a showing of psychological harm. There is a seperate "tender years" doctrine which allows the introduction of evidence of prior sexual activity or knowledge by young children (10-12 years and younger), despite normal rape shield law protections, to allow the defense to attack a spoken or unspoken inferences of sexual naivete of the alleged victim. Maine currently does not allow a “tender years exception in criminal cases under this type of rule. There is a similar rule in child protective proceedings and this rule goes so far as to allow the judge to exclude child witnesses under subpoena by the defense upon a showing of psychological harm. There is a seperate “tender years” doctrine which allows the introduction of evidence of prior sexual activity or knowledge by young children (10-12 years and younger), despite normal rape shield law protections, to allow the defense to attack a spoken or unspoken inferences of sexual naivete of the alleged victim.

]]> By: Anonymous http://apublicdefender.com/2007/03/04/tender-years-exception-to-hearsay/comment-page-1/#comment-357 Anonymous Wed, 07 Mar 2007 02:50:58 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/2007/03/04/tender-years-exception-to-hearsay/#comment-357 someone's staff attorney went nuts. someone’s staff attorney went nuts.

]]>