Does Admitting Evidence of Child’s Out-of-Court Statements Violate Defendant’s Right to Confront Accuser?
State of Ohio v. Michael S. Arnold, Case no. 2008-1693 Franklin County ISSUE: When a child who is an alleged victim of sexual abuse is not available to testify or be cross-examined in court, does a trial court violate the defendant’s constitutional right to confront witnesses against him by admitting into evidence a video of an interview with the victim that was conducted by a social worker employed by a child advocacy center? BACKGROUND: In December 2005, the mother of a four-year-old girl identified as M.A. called police to report her suspicion that the child had been sexually assaulted that evening by Michael Arnold of Columbus. The child was transported to an emergency room where a rape kit examination was performed. She was then was sent home overnight. The following morning M.A. was taken to the Center for Child and Family Advocacy (CCFA), a special multidisciplinary unit for victims of child and domestic abuse located at Nationwide Children’s Hospital. Kerri Marshall, a social w
Related Questions
- Are anonymous accusations accepted in all dioceses? Does an accused priest have the right to face his accuser?
- Which amendment to the constitution guarantees a trail by jury and the right confront the accuser?
- Does Omission of Closing Argument in Bench Trial Violate Defendant’s Right to Due Process of Law?
