Crawford v. Com.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “‘[t]he correct inquiry is whether, assuming that the damaging potential of the [error] were fully realized, a reviewing court might nonetheless say that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt’” - 18 - (quoting Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 684 (1986
• applying harmless error review to violation of the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause
• applying harmless error review to violation of the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause
• applying harmless error review to violation of the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause
• “On appeal, constitutional arguments present questions of law that this Court reviews de novo.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).