Commonwealth v. Ludwig
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
594 A.2d 281 (1991)
- Written by Deanna Curl, JD
Facts
In August 1984, Ludwig (defendant) was charged with rape and other offenses for the sexual abuse of his five-year-old daughter. When asked about the abuse at the preliminary hearing, the child testified that she did not remember what happened and became unresponsive to further questions. The commonwealth (plaintiff) requested a continuance to file a motion to allow the child to provide videotaped testimony. At a hearing on the motion, a psychologist testified that the child had become emotionally frozen during testimony, that the freezing could occur again, and that being forced to testify in front of Ludwig could hinder the progress she had made following the alleged abuse. The court allowed the child to testify via closed-circuit television from another room for the conclusion of the preliminary hearing and at trial. At trial, the child could hear and answer questions, but she could not see inside the courtroom. Following his conviction, Ludwig appealed, alleging that the testimony violated his right to confront the witness under the Pennsylvania Constitution.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Zappala, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
