Washington Supreme Court· 7/3/1997

State v. Rohrich

Citations

132 Wash. 2d 472
939 P.2d 697
1997 Wash. LEXIS 424

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that child does not testify within meaning of statute \when she does not give testimony describing the acts of sexual contact alleged in the hearsay\
concluding that child does not testify within meaning of statute “when she does not give testimony describing the acts of sexual contact alleged in the hearsay”
concluding that under Washington's child hearsay statute, the Confrontation Clause is violated when a child is called to testify at trial but \is not asked and does not answer any questions relating to ... the acts of sexual contact alleged in the hearsay\
“[N]othing about child hearsay indicates the hearsay state ment would be more reliable than an in-court declaration of the same accusation.”
legislature intended the child hearsay statute to be constitutional and carefully drafted it to avoid any confrontation clause problems
Washington statutory child hearsay exception

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Guy, Sanders

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

25 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this 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.