Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

United States Vs. Owens

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Feb 23, 1988

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

40 entries 8 linked 32 unlinked
Show
  1. Douglas Vs. Alabama US Supreme Court · Apr 05, 1965
  2. Ohio Vs. Roberts US Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1980
  3. Dutton Vs. Evans US Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1970
  4. Neil Vs. Biggers US Supreme Court · Dec 06, 1972
  5. Delaware Vs. Fensterer US Supreme Court · Nov 04, 1985
  6. Mancusi Vs. Stubbs US Supreme Court · Jun 26, 1972
  7. Pennsylvania Vs. Ritchie US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1987
  8. Manson Vs. Brathwaite US Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1977
  9. U.S. 554 (1988) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Owens
    Search
  10. U.S. 554 (1988) United States v. Owens
    Search
  11. fair opportunity to bring out the witness' bad memory and other facts tending to discredit his testimony. Cf. Delaware v. Fensterer
    Search
  12. hearsay declarant's memory loss both with respect to the Confrontation Clause, see, e.g., United States ex rel. Thomas v. Cuyler
    Search
  13. F.2d 460, 462-463 (CA3 1977), and with respect to Rule 802, see, e.g., United States v. Lewis
    Search
  14. This has long been read as securing an adequate opportunity to cross-examine adverse witnesses. See, e.g., Mattox v. United
    Search
  15. founded upon a witness' loss of memory, but in two cases has expressly left that possibility open. In California v. Green
    Search
  16. Id. at 399 U. S. 188 . In Delaware v. Fensterer
    Search
  17. Delaware v. Van
    Search
  18. testimony, and the special importance of cross-examination when such hearsay is proffered. See, e.g., Manson v. Brathwaite
    Search
  19. standard applicable to the Confrontation Clause violation, see Delaware v. Van
    Search
  20. d)(1)(A), by simply asserting lack of memory of the facts to which the prior testimony related. See United States v. Murphy
    Search
  21. declarant testified under oath, subject to cross-examination, and the jury was able to observe his demeanor. People v. Green
    Search
  22. California v. Green
    Search
  23. Nelson v. O'Neil
    Search
  24. Ibid. (quoting California v. Green
    Search
  25. supra, at 399 U. S. 161 ). See also Ohio v. Roberts
    Search
  26. these substantive constitutional requirements today, the Court relies almost exclusively on our decision in Delaware v. Fensterer
    Search
  27. In Ohio v. Roberts
    Search
  28. since confirmed that the Sixth Amendment guarantees an opportunity for meaningful cross-examination. See Kentucky v. Stincer
    Search
  29. U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Owens
    Search
  30. Cf. Delaware v. Fensterer
    Search
  31. Thomas v. Cuyler
    Search
  32. United States v. Lewis
    Search
  33. Mattox v. United
    Search
  34. In California v. Green
    Search
  35. In Delaware v. Fensterer
    Search
  36. See United States v. Murphy
    Search
  37. People v. Green
    Search
  38. Nelson v. O'Neil
    Search
  39. See Kentucky v. Stincer
    Search
  40. Kentucky v. Stincer
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial