Ex parte Ah Sam

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that whether Bruton applies depends on whether the co-defendant’s statement was “testimonial in nature,” and is not limited to statements the co-defendant made to the police while in custody
• remanding case for trial court to determine if defendant’s custodial statement was voluntary and noting that defendant could appeal in the event of a judgment against him on that issue and reassert remaining issues as well
• remanding case for trial court to determine if defendant’s custodial statement was voluntary and noting that defendant could appeal in the event of a judgment against him on that issue and reassert remaining issues as well
• “[A] co- defendant’s statement meets the Confrontation Clause’s standard for admissibility when it does not refer to the existence of the defendant and is accompanied by instructions limiting its use to the case against the confessing co-defendant.”
• error to admit co-defendant’s testimonial statement against defendant in joint trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).