Skip to main content

Bartee v. State

Citations

  • 922 So. 2d 1065
  • 2006 WL 663408

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that 911 tapes are admissible under the spontaneous statement exception to hearsay rule, and that the Confrontation Clause was not violated where 911 calls were nontestimonial in nature as statements were not made in response to police interrogation
  • holding that 911 tapes are admissible under the spontaneous statement exception to hearsay rule, and that the Confrontation Clause was not violated where 911 calls were nontestimonial in nature as statements were not made in response to police interrogation
  • finding statements victim made to officers in response to questioning after incident were testimonial and that the use of statements at trial violated defendant's right to confront victim where victim was unavailable
  • statements made in response to questioning by police officer who is investigating a crime were testimonial under Crawford

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Monaco

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.