Supreme Court· 4/21/1987

Richardson v. Marsh

Citations

481 U.S. 200
107 S. Ct. 1702
95 L. Ed. 2d 176
1987 U.S. LEXIS 1812
55 U.S.L.W. 4509

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the Confrontation Clause is not violated by the admission of a nontestifying codefendant’s confession with a proper limiting instruction
holding that Bruton does not categorically exclude confession that is incriminating “only when linked with evidence introduced later at trial”
holding that admission of a statement was not a Bruton violation where it \does not directly inculpate anyone\
holding that Bruton applies only to out-of-court statements that are “facially incriminating” and that directly implicate the defendant
holding that a “limiting instruction” is “proper” when admitting “a non[-]testifying codefendant’s confession” at a joint trial
holding that redaction of co-defendant’s confession, in conjunction with proper limiting instruction, prevented Bru-ton violation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Scalia, Rehnquist, White, Blackmun, Powell, O'Connor, Stevens, Brennan, Marshall

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

1,610 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Richardson v. Marsh

3 other CourtListener records share this case 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.