Ohio v. Clark

Holding: The introduction at trial of statements made by a three-year-old boy to his teachers identifying his mother’s boyfriend as the source of his injuries did not violate the Confrontation Clause, when the child did not testify at trial, because the statements were not made with the primary purpose of creating evidence for prosecution.

Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Alito on June 18, 2015. Justice Scalia filed an opinion concurring in the judgement, in which Justice Ginsburg joined. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgement.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

  • Eliminating sex discrimination through research, education and legal activities
  • OHIO NOW ELF CONTACT INFORMATION

    172 E. Royal Forest Blvd
    Columbus, OH 43214
    voice: 614-440-526-8204
    e-mail:ohionow@msn.com
  • WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW….

    Brochures available FREE by calling voice mail box 614-470-3276 or e-mailing ohionow@msn.com and listing the titles requested.

    What you should know...from the OH State Bar Association.

    TITLES
    1. Attorneys
    2. Bankruptcy
    3. Child Support
    4. Divorce, Dissolution and Separation
    5. Divorce Mediation
    6. Ohio's Marriage Laws
    7. Sharing Responsibilities after Separation
    8. Tenant/Landlord Rights and Obligations
    9. Your Rights if Questioned, Stopped or Arrested
  • CALENDAR

    August 2018
    M T W T F S S
         
     12345
    6789101112
    13141516171819
    20212223242526
    2728293031  

  • COSMO is a workplace giving campaign. Does your workplace participate?