Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 9/14/2011

Coronado v. State

Citations

351 S.W.3d 315
2011 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1248
2011 WL 4436474

How courts have described this case

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

holding that article 38.071, § 2, provision allowing for use of videotaped ex parte interrogatories submitted by defendant and posed by \neutral\ forensic interviewer was not \constitutional substitute for live cross-examination and confrontation\ of victim
repeating suggestion by commentator that some videotapes could be redacted to eliminate testimonial statement to avoid a confrontation problem
“[The Confrontation Clause] commands, not that evidence be reliable, but that reliability be assessed in a particular manner: by testing in the crucible of cross-examination.” (quoting Crawford, 541 U.S. at 61)
“If the objective purpose of the interview is to question a person about past events and that person’s statements about those past events would likely be relevant to a future criminal proceeding, then they are testimonial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cochran, Price, Womack, Johnson, Alcala, Hervey, Keasler, Keller, Meyers

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

69 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

50 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.