McDonnough v. Commonwealth

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the admission of a statement in violation of the Confrontation Clause was harmless based on the sum of other testimonial and physical evidence of the defendant’s guilt
• concluding that the admission of a statement in violation of the Confrontation Clause was harmless based on the sum of other testimonial and physical evidence of the defendant's guilt
• “We hold, however, that due diligence requires, at a minimum, that a party attempt to subpoena the witness or provide a reasonable explanation why a subpoena was not issued.”
• “Whether a party has used due diligence is a factual question that will be reversed on appeal only if it is plainly wrong or without evidence to support it.”
• discussing the failure to produce a witness at trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).