1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
dezoksy [38]
1 year ago
12

Even if a declarant gives a statement to police concerning an alleged crime, that statement could still qualify as non-testimoni

al if police question the declarant while responding to an _________ ____________ (two words). The Supreme Court demarcated this boundary for testimonial hearsay in Davis v. Washington, 126 S. Ct. 2266 (2006), where the primary purpose of the questioning was not to collect evidence of a past crime, but to secure the scene and protect the declarant.
Courts applying the Davis exception most often summarize it with phrases such as "ongoing emergency" or "emergency situation." When police are responding to an ongoing emergency, their motive is to ensure the safety of all concerned, not to collect evidence. The Supreme Court ruled in Davis that statements elicited by police while responding to an ongoing emergency are not testimonial for purposes of the Confronta
Law
1 answer:
alisha [4.7K]1 year ago
4 0

Courts applying the Davis exception most often summarize it with phrases such as "ongoing emergency" or "emergency situation." When police are responding to an ongoing emergency, their motive is to ensure the safety of all concerned, not to collect evidence. The Supreme Court ruled in Davis that statements elicited by police while responding to an ongoing emergency are not testimonial for purposes of the Confrontation Clause.

Testimonial” hearsay is a statement that:

-ITlooks like the kind of testimony that would be offered at trial in aid of prosecution;

-It is made when the circumstances objectively indicate that there is no ongoing emergency; and

-The primary purpose of the interrogation is to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to a later criminal prosecution.

The Confrontation Clause of the United States Constitution protects the right of a criminal defendant to be confronted by his or her accusers in Court and to cross-examine any testimony that they may offer. The admission of hearsay (an out-of-court statement) – even if admissible under an exception to the rule against hearsay – can be in direct conflict with the right of Confrontation.

On the other hand, “non-testimonial” hearsay is a statement that:

-It is made primarily for the purpose of assisting police to meet an ongoing emergency; or

-It was made primarily for a purpose other than discovering, establishing or proving past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution.

To learn more about Testimony visit here ; brainly.com/question/29244222?referrer=searchResultssearchResults

#SPJ4

You might be interested in
Why are correctional officers held to high standard of ethics according to this segment ?​
IrinaK [193]
It’s probably most likely a
8 0
3 years ago
How can you prove that a documents presented to you is a public documents ?​
Dovator [93]

Answer:

Public Documents are proved by Secondary Evidence. Private Documents are proved by original i.e. Primary Evidence. The certified copy of a public document is to be admitted in judicial proceedings. The secondary evidence of the original document is not to be admitted in judicial proceedings.

6 0
3 years ago
Statutes that impose mandatory prison sentences, generally a life sentence, on those convicted of an offense if they have been p
alexgriva [62]

Statutes that impose mandatory prison sentences,  on those convicted of an offense if they have been previously convicted of two prior serious criminal offenses are called three-strikes law.

<h3>What is three-strikes law?</h3>

Three-strikes law, serves as the  criminal sentencing structure which is been imposed on anyone found guilty for the third violation of violent felonies.

Therefore, Statutes that impose mandatory prison sentences,  on those convicted of an offense if they have been previously convicted of two prior serious criminal offenses are called three-strikes law.

Learn more about Three-strikes law at

brainly.com/question/13881309

#SPJ1

4 0
2 years ago
.
Veseljchak [2.6K]

Answer:

Neither man wanted to press charges.

Explanation:

I'll just say why the other answers are wrong

B. There are witnesses, it says that several people were loitering around the club

C. There does not need to be camera footage of the fight to arrest one or both of the men and charge them with assault, battery, etc.

D. The officers arrived after the fight had ended and they had been injured, also officers do not personally have to witness a crime to charge an individual with one.

5 0
2 years ago
Fill in the blank, both are the same answer.
Elina [12.6K]
Answer= Due process
I took civics
6 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Discuss what changes you think typical
    7·1 answer
  • The court official who has the power to decide federal bankruptcy cases is
    13·1 answer
  • Why doesnt america and other continents print their owm money​
    11·2 answers
  • You arrive at the scene of a burglary. Based on the shoeprints outside the window, you can tell that is where the suspect entere
    13·1 answer
  • Can my mom just email the school saying that I was sick and I don't have to get a doctor's note? ​
    9·2 answers
  • Jeremy runs a small manufacturing business, Off late, he has come across some incidents of vandalism and shoplifting in his ware
    10·1 answer
  • A. Who does what? Read each statement and decide if it is about the House of Representatives, the
    15·1 answer
  • The common law of Europe in the dark ages was developed by custom and usage,
    12·1 answer
  • Briefly define the term "assembly line justice" in your own words.
    14·1 answer
  • Do you need to get permission to cite a song title
    15·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!