100% Money back guaranteed

Document provided by...: www.proquest.com; (Learn more...); ProQuest creates specialized information resources and technologies that propel successful research, discovery, and lifelong learning.

Are you the owner of this document? Click here for information on why it's on Docstoc.

About This Document: On Jun 25, 2008, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in Giles v. California that restricted the doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing. Prior to Giles, most lower courts had determined that the accused forfeits confrontation rights by killing the hearsay declarant -- even if the motive for the homicide was not to silence the victim as a trial witness. This article examines the landscape of confrontation rights after Giles. The article considers the theoretical underpinnings of the forfeiture doctrine, and presents a framework within which courts can analyze claims of forfeiture by wrongdoing. This article also proposes to amend Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(6), which codifies the doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing. The purpose of this article is to facilitate the effective prosecution of domestic violence cases, particularly domestic homicide, while complying with the new requirements announced by the Supreme Court in Giles.

Stats: Type:
Acrobat PDF; Size:
23574 kb; Pages:
56; Views:
7; Posted:
06/11/10

Categories: DocStore > Periodicals > Law
Tags: Texas Law Review, Apr 2009, The Sound of Silence: Holding Battere..., Lininger, Tom, Feature, Supreme Court decisions, Forfeitures, Domestic violence, Murders & murder attempts, Right of confrontation, 4330, Litigation, 9190, United States, United States--US

The Sound of Silence: Holding Batterers Accountable for Silencing Their Victims

Document Sample

The Sound of Silence: Holding Batterers Accountable for Silencing Their Victims

Tom Lininger

Texas Law Re

By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy and terms of service