Adrian Martell Davis v. Washington (547 U.S. 813)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 19, 2006 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 547 U.S. 813 · 126 S. Ct. 2266
- Decided
- June 19, 2006
- Term
- October Term 2005
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Scalia
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court. These cases require us to determine when statements made to law enforcement personnel during a 911 call or at a crime scene are “testimonial” and thus subject to the requirements of the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause. I A The relevant statements in Davis v. Washington, No. 05-5224, were made to a 911 emergency operator on February 1, 2001. When the operator answered the initial call, the connection terminated before anyone spoke. She reversed the call, and Michelle McCottry answered. In the ensuing conversation, the operator ascertained that McCottry was involved in a domestic disturbance with her former boyfriend Adrian Davis, the petitioner in this ease: “911 Operator: Hello. “Complainant: Hello. “911 Operator: What’s going on? “Complainant: He’s here jumpin’ on me again. “911 Operator: Okay. Listen to me carefully. Are you in a house or an apartment? “Complainant: I’m in a house. “911 Operator: Are there any weapons? “Complainant: No. He’s usin’ his fists. “911 Operator: Okay. Has he been drinking? “Complainant: No. “911 Operator: Okay, sweetie. I’ve got help started. Stay on the line with me, okay? “Complainant: I’m on the line. “911 Operator: Listen to me carefully. Do you know his last name? “Complainant: It’s Davis. “911 Operator: Davis? Okay, what’s his first name? “Complainant: Adran “911 Operator: What is…
Excerpt of a 35,837-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.