Document Type
Working Paper
Publication Date
6-25-2006
SSRN Discipline
Economics Research Network; Legal Scholarship Network; Criminal Law & Procedure eJournals; Law School Research Papers - Legal Studies; LSN Subject Matter eJournals; Law School Research Papers - Public Law & Legal Theory; Constitutional Law, Jurisprudence & Legal Philosophy eJournals
Abstract
This short essay explores the relationship between the Supreme Courts recent decisions regarding sentencing on one hand and the Confrontation Clause on the other Despite the vigorous litigation over and commentary regarding these issues a possible relationship between them is uncertain and largely has been neglected thus far Although the Supreme Court has not answered definitively whether a confrontation right ever applies at sentencing several federal circuits have concluded that it does not Courts have adhered to this result postBooker and postCrawford One implication of the Supreme Courts recent cases however is that whenever a factual issue must be decided in order to impose a particular sentence then a confrontation right should exist as to that issue And the reverse implication follows as well a confrontation right does not apply to issues that are not necessary to sentences
Recommended Citation
Michael S. Pardo & Daniel M. Filler,
Confrontation Clause Implications of Constitutional Sentencing Options,
(2006).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.ua.edu/fac_working_papers/275