Ohio v. Clark
United States Supreme Court
135 S. Ct. 2173 (2015)
- Written by Stephanie Yu, JD
Facts
In March 2010, Darius Clark (defendant) dropped off L.P., his three–year–old son, at preschool. L.P.’s teachers noticed that one of L.P.’s eyes was bloodshot, and they uncovered more bruises on his body. The teachers asked L.P. who had done this to him. L.P. implicated that Clark was his abuser. Clark was indicted on several counts of child abuse by a grand jury. At trial, L.P.’s statements to his teachers were introduced into evidence. L.P. himself was barred from testifying under Ohio state law, which deemed him incompetent to testify. Clark moved to exclude the statements based on the Confrontation Clause. The trial court denied the motion, finding that L.P.’s statements were not testimonial. The jury convicted Clark. Clark appealed, and the court of appeals reversed. The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Alito, J.)
Concurrence (Thomas, J.)
Concurrence (Scalia, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
