Archive
 
Video Library
Broadcast
 
Broadcast ScheduleChannel LocatorAffiliatesDaily Streaming Schedule
About
 
About the Ohio ChannelFrequently Asked QuestionsContact UsJob OpportunitiesSite RequirementsMedia Information
 
 
A SERVICE OF OHIO'S PUBLIC BROADCASTING STATIONS
A SERVICE OF OHIO'S PUBLIC BROADCASTING STATIONS
ARCHIVEBROADCASTABOUT
Total Views 87,293,005
Total Views 87,293,005
Broadcast Schedule Channel Locator Affiliates Daily Streaming Schedule
 
 
About The Ohio Channel Frequently Asked Questions Contact Us Job Opportunities Site Requirements Media Information
 
 
 
Case No. 2010-2260 State of Ohio v. James D. Hood (Mp3) Expand
 
 
November 2, 2011
11-02-2011
798 Views
Share Download
 
Start At    sec      End At    sec
 
Link
Embed Code
Available Versions
Download File
 
 
To download a video: right-click on the version you'd like to save, then choose "Save Link As..." and save to your desktop.
 
Description
Was Court's Admission of Cell Phone Records at Trial Without Expert Authentication Unconstitutional? Under Sixth Amendment Right to Confront, Cross-Examine Witnesses

8th District Court of Appeals (Cuyahoga County)

ISSUE: Does a trial court violate a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses against him when it allows the state to introduce records documenting cell phone traffic of alleged co-participants in a crime without requiring authenticating testimony by an expert witness who can be cross-examined by defense counsel with regard to the reliability of the proffered records and the factual conclusions that can and cannot be drawn from them?
Tags
Ohio GovernmentJudicial BranchSupreme Court of Ohio
 
 
 
 
Copyright Disclaimer Terms of Use Contact Us Support
 
 
© 2025 The Ohio Channel / ideastream.
All Rights Reserved.