Satterwhite v. Commonwealth

How courts have described this case

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

• “[T]he admission of dying declarations as evidence[ ] is not repugnant to the bill of rights.” (quoting Hill v. Commonwealth, 43 Va. (2 Gratt.) 594, 608 (1845))
• “[W]e hold Crawford did not upend the traditional view that dying declarations serve as an exception both to the common law hearsay rule and the constitutional right of a defendant to confront his accusers.”
• “[W]e hold Crawford did not upend the traditional view that dying declarations serve as an exception both to the common law hearsay rule and the constitutional right of a defendant to confront his accusers.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).