Tennessee Supreme Court· 8/17/2007

State v. Lewis

Citations

235 S.W.3d 136
2007 Tenn. LEXIS 649

How courts have described this case

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

recognizing that a defendant’s statements are admissible pursuant to Rule 803(1.2) but are “subject to exclusion . . . by other rules of evidence”
holding that pursuant to Rule 803(1.2), “[a]nything the opposing party said or wrote out of court is admissible in court against that party”
holding that “[i]t is our view, therefore, that a Roberts analysis for nontestimonial evidence is not necessary to satisfy the state constitution’s ‘face-to-face’ requirement and Crawford and its progeny establish appropriate guidelines”
holding that “[i]t is our view, therefore, that a Roberts analysis for nontestimonial evidence is not necessary to satisfy the state constitution’s ‘face-to-face’ requirement and Crawford and its progeny establish appropriate guidelines”
holding “that this single hearsay exception survives the mandate of Crawford regardless of its testimonial nature”
explaining that, if testimonial statements are to be admitted, “the rule in Crawford ... not only requires the unavailability of the declarant, ... but [also] the opportunity for cross-examination”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gary R. Wade

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

398 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named State v. Lewis

1,328 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.