Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1/25/2007

State v. Wright

Citations

726 N.W.2d 464
2007 Minn. LEXIS 44
2007 WL 177690

How courts have described this case

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

concerning the trial testimony of an investigating officer who relayed the on-scene statements of assault victims who did not testify at trial
remanding for factual determination of whether the defendant forfeited his confrontation right by procuring the unavailability of the victim and her sister, who had not been subject to earlier cross-examination
remanding for determination of whether intent to procure witness's unavailability was shown
evidence had substantial persuasive value where it “elicited new information” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted)
distinguishing the facts from those in Davis
“Given the circumstances of this case and in particular, the state of the law interpreting the Confrontation Clause at the time of Wright’s trial, we hold that the state has not waived the opportunity to present additional evidence to further develop a factual record on forfeiture.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lori Swanson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

22 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.