State v. Burton
Citations
- 2025 ND 83
Syllabus
Under the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause, in all criminal prosecutions, the accused has the right to be confronted with the witnesses against him. The admission of out-of-court testimonial statements in criminal cases is precluded, unless the witness is unavailable to testify and the accused has had an opportunity to cross-examine the declarant. Statements are nontestimonial when the primary purpose is to enable police assistance to meet an ongoing emergency, and are considered testimonial when the circumstances objectively indicate that there is no such ongoing emergency, and that the primary purpose of the interrogation is to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution. Rule 901, N.D.R.Ev., provides for methods of authentication of evidence. All authentication requires is that the party offering an item of evidence produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is. Rule 803(1), N.D.R.Ev., provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for a statement describing or explaining an event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant perceived the event or condition. Because N.D.R.Ev. 803(1) applied, a district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting a 911 call recording into evidence.
Judges: Bahr, Douglas Alan
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
1 case in this archive cites this case.
Cites
20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 2004-03-08· cited 14,756×
- Davis v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 2006-06-19· cited 4,179×
- State v. ThompsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2010-10-25· cited 68×
- State v. ThompsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2010-01-12· cited 47×
- State v. ChisholmNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2012-07-12· cited 22×
- State v. GardnerNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2023-06-21· cited 17×
- State v. CookNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2018-04-12· cited 14×
- State v. PoulorNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2019-08-22· cited 12×
- State v. ThomasNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2022-06-08· cited 10×
- State v. VickermanNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2022-11-10· cited 10×
- State v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2017-06-14· cited 7×
- State v. JensenNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1988-02-01· cited 5×
- State v. HirschkornNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2020-12-17· cited 5×
- Meiers v. NDDOTNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2025-01-23· cited 5×
- State v. HendersonNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2024-03-07· cited 4×
- State v. WoodmanNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2025-01-09· cited 3×
- State v. FroelichNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2017-06-29· cited 2×
- State v. TeggatzNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2017-07-12· cited 2×
- Estate of BeachNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2022-01-06· cited 2×
- State v. Good BearNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2024-02-08· cited 1×
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.