Kansas v. Ventris

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a statement obtained in violation of the Sixth Amendment could nonetheless be used for impeachment purposes
• holding that an informant’s testimony, concededly elicited in violation of the Sixth Amendment, was admissible to challenge a defendant’s inconsistent testimony at trial
• holding that testimony elicited in violation of Sixth Amendment is admissible to impeach
• holding that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel includes “the opportunity for a defendant to consult with an attorney and to have him investigate the case and prepare a defense for trial”
• observing that “it is the province of the jury to weigh the credibility of competing witnesses”
• holding prior inconsistent statement made in violation of Sixth Amendment right to counsel was admissible to challenge defendant’s inconsistent testimony at trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).