Washington, U.S. Supreme Court Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

upper-case letter, U.S. Supreme Court - Essay ExampleThis led to him being convicted under the clause of foe on the sixth amendment as the 911 c both was enough to have him in jail for the decided time. Issue The issue before the greet in the current case is whether Davis could still be convicted since McCottry did not proclaim against him in court. The court was forced to use the 911 c each(prenominal) recording that was from the call McCottry had do that night to find Davis guilty of domestic violation. The court also used the fact that Davis ran from the scene as a felony that he could easily be found guilty by the Supreme Court if the both issues were put before them. There was also proof that this was not the first time Davis had assaulted McCottry from the recording. Rule The rule in this case is defined by the Washington court 541 U. S. 36 of appeal as well as the Supreme Court where the case required the court to decide whether the clause used which was the confrontatio n could only apply to the testimonial hearsay. The rule insisted the recording bore words which were enough for a testimony. Analysis The confrontation clause requires statements from former(a) sources that must go under the same prohibition to have clear classification to hold the suspect. The case was command against Davis though McCottry never testified they used the recording brought forth by the officer in charge that night. Discussion From the rule it is evident that the confrontation clause could be used to have fair rules regardless of the testimonies. Conclusion The ratiocination in the case to find Davis guilty of domestic felony regardless of absence of the main witness at the trial by using recording made to report the same meant that the confrontation and hearsay can be used to rule fairly. Question 2 Facts In the case of United States v. Odom, U. S. discusses the issue of amiable competency as it relates to a witness report under FRE 601. The defendant Odom was a c andidate for reelection he was the deputy sheriff and was appealing with his team for their convictions arising for casting wild ballots. They were all charged with participation in a plot to vote more than once as required by the constitution and were convicted at all counts. Issue The issue before the court in this case is that the entire defendant has appealed many times with all their appeals being rejected. This is because all the defendants were running for reelection heretofore they had schemed to vote more than once with the excuse of using absentee votes. There is also the fact that the residents of Alexander County were people of advanced age both mentally and physically ill. Rule According to FRE 601, state law governs a witness competency where every witness is deemed competent unless proved otherwise. One of the effects of this rule is to abolish, among other facts, mental capacity as a ground that would reduce a witness competency. Analysis The defendants in the case complained that the court erred in allowing unsworn and bumbling witnesses to testify for the prosecution in the case. In this case, the defendants were challenging the mental competency of the inhabitants of the Rest home. The defendants argued that the witnesses from the Rest home were incompetent to either appear or testify in the trial. According to the defendants, the procedure in which the district court used to resolve the competency of the witnesses was faulty. The defendants proposed a motion that the district judge should have ruled on the competency at the camera hearing. However, according to Rule 601, the trial courts responsibility to rule on the competency of the witnesses is rebutted. The rule states that all witnesses are deemed competent except where state law