Hello.
Although there may be more than one U.S. Supreme Court case from the
1970s that allowed hearsay as evidence, a landmark 1970s case on this
issue was Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 (1973).
See:
Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 (1973)
http://tillers.net/ev-course/materials/chambers.html
In that case, defendant Leon Chambers was accused of murdering a
police officer. Chambers tried to introduce the testimony of three
witnesses to whom another man, Gable McDonald, had purportedly
admitted that he was the one who shot the officer. The State of
Mississippi objected to the testimony on the grounds of hearsay. The
Mississippi court sustained the objected and barred the testimony as
hearsay.
The U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Mississippi decision and ruled
that Chambers should have been able to introduce the testimony even if
it was hearsay.
The Court's justification was that a defendant has a constitutional
right to present a defense and introduce evidence that someone else
may be guilty of the crime. The Court ruled that "the rights to
confront and cross-examine witnesses and to call witnesses in one's
own behalf have long been recognized as essential to due process" and
essentially trumped Mississippi's hearsay rule. The court summarized
its justification as follows:
"Although perhaps no rule of evidence has been more respected or more
frequently applied in jury trials than that applicable to the
exclusion of hearsay, exceptions tailored to allow the introduction of
evidence which in fact is likely to be trustworthy have long existed.
The testimony rejected by the trial court here bore persuasive
assurances of trustworthiness and thus was well within the basic
rationale of the exception for declarations against interest. That
testimony also was critical to Chambers' defense. In these
circumstances, where constitutional rights directly affecting the
ascertainment of guilt are implicated, the hearsay rule may not be
applied mechanistically to defeat the ends of justice."
Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 (1973)
http://tillers.net/ev-course/materials/chambers.html
Here is a good explanation of the Chambers case:
"The United States Supreme Court has found the right to effectively
present a defense to be constitutionally required. Evidentiary rules
cannot prevent a defendant from presenting his defense. Chambers v.
Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 (1972). In Chambers the defendant was
prevented by Mississippi evidence rule from putting on a confession
from a third party that another person said he was the murderer
because it was hearsay which was a denial of his right to show another
person did the crime. The Court said," The right of an accused in a
criminal trial due process is, in essence, the right to a fair
opportunity to defend against the state's accusations. The rights to
confront and cross-examine witnesses and to call witnesses in one's
own behalf have long been recognized as essential to due process." Id.
at 294."
source: The Right to Present the Defense
http://dpa.state.ky.us/library/advocate/jan00/defense.html
Chambers v. Mississippi is considered a landmark Supreme Court case on
the hearsay issue and is widely cited. For example, in this Maryland
case:
"On appeal, Miller concedes this evidence is hearsay but argues that,
under Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 (1973), exclusion of the
evidence violates his constitutional right to present a defense.
Miller argues that, under Chambers, a defendant's due process right to
present evidence in his behalf may "trump" state evidentiary rules,
including the hearsay rule."
http://www.court.state.nd.us/court/opinions/20000337.htm
------------
search strategy:
"supreme court" "hearsay rule" "due process"
"Chambers v. Mississippi"
I hope this helps. If anything is unclear, please let me know via the
"request clarification" feature. Thanks. |
